except it were out of the bookes of faith or who would trust them in diuine causes without some colour of diuine Scriptures But what meanes the Lord hath left his sheepe to distinguish true shepheards from wolues dissembling their habite and theeues pretending his name this is the question that now we bee in Phi. It is And there must wee say bee some certaine Tribunall on earth where truth may be found at all times and of all men that bee willing to seeke for it otherwise there should be no stay for religion nor end of contention euery man pretending his faith to be trueth and no man hauing authoritie to decide which is trueth which were most absurd Theo. A Tribunal in earth to decide which is trueth Whose Tribunal shall that be Phi. The Churches Theo. We be now as neere as we were before If the truth be douted of the church must needes be much more doubted of because the church is the number of men professing the truth And howe can the professours of trueth be seuered from others so long as the trueth by which they should bee knowen is in question You doe but wast your breath if you goe not more directly to worke Phi. You would fayne call the Church in question but that you can not Theo. Away with these follies Where fayth faileth the church fayleth and hee that affirmeth your doctrine to bee false denyeth your assemblies and multitudes to bee the Church The supposing your selues to bee the Church when your fayth shoulde bee tried is a fonde and vaine delay Shall that be trueth which you professe though Christ say nay Phi. We say not so Theo. Then suffer those to bee his sheepe that heare his voyce and clayme not his fold vntill you be his sheepe Phi. We do not Theo. Wee must be first resolued which is his voyce before we can agree who are his sheepe Phi. I know that and yet which is the sheepheards voyce the sheepe must iudge and not the wolues The. In deed our sauiour saith The sheepe follow the shepheard for they know his voyce A stranger they will not follow but flee from him for they knew not the voyce of strangers applying this to himself My sheep saith he heare my voyce and follow me The reason went before for they know the voyce of their shepheard So that by the position of our Sauiour his sheepe must be able to discerne his voyce from a strangers Phi. What else Theo. His voyce is his woord his sheepe are the faithfull his folde is his church If the Lorde himselfe referre his sheepe to their exact knowledge of his voyce for their perfect direction why woulde you force the flocke of Christ to the court of Rome there to learne at your handes and vppon your only credite the voyce of their shepheard Phi. We would haue them followe the direction of Christes church in discerning the sound of Christes voyce Theo. And the church of Christ neuer directed any man by prescribing certaine places or persons where trueth could not fayle but only by the generall and constant profession of the same faith from the Apostles downe-ward in all ages and countries Phi. The church commendeth succession councels and Apostolicall Seates as good helpes to hit the right sense of the Scriptures Theo. But neuer as infallible notes to discerne the trueth Phi. The Bishops of the vniuersall Church haue as S. Ireneus sayth receiued with their Episcopal succession the grace and gift of vnderstanding the trueth Theo. You do that auncient father wrong in the place which you bring Ireneus limiteth succession after the same maner that we do noting successiō to be nothing worth vnlesse sound doctrine and holy conuersation be thereunto ioyned His woordes be Wee must therfore obey those Priests which are in the Church I meane those which haue their succession from the Apostles which together with their succession in office haue receiued charisma veritatis certum the sure doctrine or gift of trueth The rest we must suspect either as heretikes or as authors of schismes and pleasers of themselues or else as hypocrites vayne glorious and couetous From all such we must abstaine and cleaue to them as I said which keepe the doctrine of the Apostles with the order of their priestly calling yeeld wholesome doctrine conuersation without offence And shewing what hee meaneth by charisma he sayth Vbi igitur charismata Domini posita sunt ibi dicere oportet veritatem Where these blessings and gifts of God are there must we learne the trueth with whome is that succession of the Church which is from the Apostles and also sounde and irreproueable Doctrine So that orderly succession sound doctrine and conuersation without blame are the giftes and graces of God which he meaneth and the one hee will not haue to bee regarded or trusted without the other Phi. Make you no more accompt of succession Theo. We cōmend succession to exclude ambition and dissention in the Church of Christ and in that respect we detest such as inuade the Pastorall function without lawfull vocation and election but that succession in place should be taken for a warrant of true Doctrine is an error of yours and so palpable that euery Child can refell it For who knoweth not that an infinite number of bishops those orderly succeeding if you looke to their dignitie and not to their doctrine haue beene heretiks And that S. Paul thus forewarned the Bishops of Ephesus Out of your selues shall rise men speaking peruerse things to draw disciples after them And the Lord when he saith Beware of false prophets noteth there shall bee prophets by their calling which shal be foūd false in their teaching as S. Peter also witnesseth There were false prophets among the people of the Iewes euen as there shall be false teachers amongst you distinguished from Godly teachers not by office but by Doctrine S. Paul graunteth many to be the ministers of Christ in outward profession and shew which in workes and deeds be the ministers of Sathan Such false Apostles saith hee are deceitful workers and transforme them selues into the Apostles of Christ. The Prince of darkenesse that can conuaie his agents to be Teachers Prophets and Apostles in the Church of Christ can place them in Bishoprikes at his pleasure and therefore the chaire is no sure defence against error Phi. Wee know some Bishops haue beene heretikes but not all Theo. Neither do we say that all were God forbid But by this that some were we proue succession to bee no sure direction vnto trueth If Berillus Paulus Samosatenus Photinus Nestorius Dioscorus Petrus Apameus Sergius Cyrus Theodorus Macarius and infinit others canonically succeeding in Seates and Churches of no small account fell afterward into pestilent heresies that which was often easie then is contingent possible still succession which saued not them from erring can not defend others from the
they lay but with such additions alterations expositions as they listed And this he maketh to be the very reason of his Rule in the wordes that go next before it The conference with them in the Scriptures can doe no good but either to stirre a mans stomacke or disquiet his braine This brood of heretikes receiue not certaine Scriptures and if they receaue any they frame them to their purpose with adding and taking from them those that they receiue they receaue them not whole and if they suffer them to stand whole they marre them with their forged expositions Their adulterating of the sense hurteth the trueth as much as their mayming of the sentences Diuers presumptions holde them from acknowledging the places by which they be conuinced they rest on those which they haue falsely corrupted ambiguously wrested Thou shalt loose nothing but thy voice in striuing with them thou shalt gaine nothing but the mouing of thy choler to heare them blaspheme And shewing that the hearers get lesse by such contentions he inferreth Ergo non ad scripturas prouocandum est we must therefore not prouoke them to the scriptures nor appoint there the conflict with them where the victory is none or not sure or skant sure enough Ireneus not long before him gaue the like report of theÌ„ for they both had to do with the selfsame sorts routs of heretiks WheÌ„ they are reproued by the scriptures they find fault with the scriptures theÌ„selues as though many things were amis in them the books of no autoritie doutfully written truth could not be had out of them if a man be ignorant of Tradition And againe when we vrge them to come to that Tradition which is kept in the Churches down from the Apostles by the successions of Bishops they vse to say that they as wiser not only than the Priests but also than the Apostles haue found out the sincere trueth and that the Apostles did mingle certaine points of the law with the wordes of our Sauiour not the Apostles alone but Christ himselfe speak somtimes earthly somtimes heauenly somtimes mixely but they vndoubtedly in defiledly sincerely know the hidden mysterie The which is nothing els but most impudently to blaspheme their maker And so it commeth to passe that they acknowledge neither the Scriptures nor Tradition Such they be with whom we deale What maruell then if Tertullian gaue counsell that such heretikes should not be prouoked to the Scriptures not that the Scriptures be defectiue in matters of faith but for that the sectaries of his time denied corrupted and maimed the Scriptures and in deede no victorie can be hoped out of Scriptures where they be neither receiued nor reuerenced as scriptures And therefore Tetrullian had good cause to speake these words in respect of the persons that were thus impudent not in respect of the scriptures as if they were vnsufficieÌ„t That error of all others Tertullian was farthest from no where farther than in this very place which you quote Aliunde scilicet loqui possent de rebus fidei nisi ex literis fidei As though they could speake touching matters of faith out of any other than out of the books of faith And obiecting to theÌ„ this very point which we now striue for Sed credant sine scripturis vt credant aduersus scripturas Let heretiks saith he beleeue without Scriptures that they may beleeue against the scriptures To beleeue without scriptures is heretical as well as to beleeue against the scriptures the next step vnto it as Tertul. here placeth theÌ„ therefore defend not the 1. lest you fal to the 2. which is the ruine of all religioÌ„ Phil. S. Basill is plaine with vs if Tertul. be not Of the doctrines which are taught in the Church we haue some laid down in writing some againe we haue receaued by traditioÌ„ froÌ„ the Apostles in a mystery that is in secret Whereof either hath like force to godlines neither doth any man contradict them that is but meanly acquainted with the lawes of the church For if we goe about to reiect those customes which are not written as of no moment before we be ware we shal condemn those things which are in the Gospel necessarie to saluation yea rather we shal bring the preaching of faith to a naked name And not long after in the same booke If nothing els hath beene receiued without scriptures neither let this be receiued but if we haue receiued many secrets without writing let vs also receiue this amongst those many I thinke it Apostolike to cleaue to traditions not written Theo. The booke which you alleage hath S. Basils name to it but the later part thereof whence those patches are taken haue neither S. Basils stile learning spirite nor age which Erasmus perceiued and confessed when he translated the book After I was past halfe the work saith he without wearines the phrase seemed to declare an other writer and to sauour of an other spirite somtimes the stile swelled as vnto the loftines of a trageâ—ie somtimes it calmed euen vnto a common kind of speach Many times there appeared some vanitie in the author as it were shewing that he had learned Aristotles predicameÌ„ts Porphiries 5. predicables Besides he digressed very ofteÌ„ froÌ„ the purpose returned vnhandsomly Last of al many things seemed to be here ther added which made litle to the matter in questioÌ„ And some things such as by their face shew their father to wit the same that hath interlaced the most lerned books of Athan. coÌ„cerning the holy ghost with his babling but trifling coÌ„ceits Phi. We care not for Erasm. iudgemeÌ„t The. You must care for Erasmus reasons vnles you caÌ„ disproue theÌ„ Phi. How proue you these places to be those that Erasm. meaneth The. If Erasmus had said nothing these places betray themselues Looke to the beginning ending of your first allegation you shall see that the middle fitteth them as well as â—atemeale doeth oysters The wordes next before are these It remaineth that we speake of the syllable with whence it came what force it hath and how farre it agreeth with the Scriptures Then your forger as a man suddainly rauished vtterly forgetting what he purposed entereth a vaine discourse of threâ—skore fifteene lines cleane besides the matter not so much as once mentioning that which hee first promised and endeth in a worse maze than be beganne with a conclusion more dissident from the middle than the middle was from the preface Dictum est igitur eaÌ„dem esse vim vtriusque proloquij So then we haue shewed that both propositions haue the same sense wherof he spake not one word in all that large discourse that went before And so he solemnly proposeth one thing digresseth abruptly to an other and concludeth absurdly with a third which ouersight in any bore were not sufferable
You must bee subiect for conscience sake If the Saintes must bee subiect to Princes ergo the Church for the Church on earth is nothing els but the collection of Saintes And if euery soule that is euery man must bee subiect howe can the Church consisting of men bee exempted But if by the Church you meane the preceptes and promises giftes and graces of God preached in the Church and poured on the Church Princes must humbly obey them and reuerently receiue them as well as other priuate men So that Prophets Apostles Euangelists and all other buylders of Christes Church as touching their Persons bee subiect to the Princes power mary the word of trueth in their mouthes and the Seales of grace in their handes because they are of God not of themselues they be farre aboue the Princes calling and regiment and in those cases kinges and Queenes if they will bee saued must submit themselues to Gods euerlasting trueth and testament as well as the meanest of their people but this neither abateth the power which God hath giuen them ouer all men nor maketh them thrall to the Popes iudiciall processe to bee forced and punished at his pleasure and therefore this notwithstanding Princes bee supreme that is superiour to all and subiect to none but onely to God Phi. Who euer taught before you that Princes were subiect only to God Theo. The Church of Christ from the beginning Colimus Imperatorem vt hominem a Deo secundum solo Deo minorem Wee reuerence the Emperour sayth Tertullian as a man next vnto God and inferiour only to God Againe Deum esse solum in cuius solius potestate sunt a quo sunt secundi post quem primi ante omnes super omnes Deos hommes It is onely God in whose power alone Princes are in comparison with him they bee second and after him first afore all and ouer all both Gods and men So likewise Optatus Super Imperatorem non est nisi solus Deus qui fecit Imperatorem Aboue the Empe-rour is none but onely GOD who made the Emperour And Chrysostome Parem vllum super terram non habet The Emperour hath no peere on earth much lesse any superiour And that Princes are aboue all Saint Paul is cleare Let euery soule bee subiect to the Superiour powers All must bee subiect to them ergo they bee superiour to all and superiour to all is supreme Chrysostome calleth the Emperour The highest and head of all men vpon earth Iustinian sayth the Emperour hath receiued a common gouernement and Principalitie ouer all men Ambrose sayth of Theodosius that hee had power ouer all men And Gregorie as you hearde affirmeth that Power is giuen to Princes from heauen ouer all men not onely Souldiers but also Priestes And since I before concluded and you confessed all men were they Monkes Priestes Bishoppes or whatsoeuer to bee subiect to the Princes power and authoritie both in causes ecclesiasticall and temporall why shoulde that nowe bee reuoked or doubted Phi. I neuer did nor will confesse Princes to bee supreme For he that iudgeth on earth in Christes steade is aboue them all Theo. You come nowe to the quicke This very clayme was the cause why the woorde supreme was added to the othe for that the Bishoppe of Rome taketh vppon him to commaund and depose Princes as their lawfull and superiour iudge To exclude this wicked presumption wee teach that Princes be supreme rulers wee meane subiect to no superiour iudge to giue a reason of their doings but onely to God Phi. This you teach but this you can not prooue Theo. It forceth not what wee can doe The burden in this case to prooue is yours and not ours You say Princes bee subiect to the Popes Consistorie wee say they bee not Must wee prooue the negatiue or must you rather make good your affirmatiue Againe Saint Paul auoucheth with vs that euery soule is subiect to their power You contradict those woordes and say the Pope is not subiect but Superiour to Princes The generall in precise tearmes concludeth for vs you except the Pope must you not prooue your exception Phi. You be loth to proue you knowe the weakenes of your side Theo. You crosse the plaine wordes of the holy Ghost and woulde put vs to refute your fansies Phi. Wee say Christs Uicar is not included in those woordes Theo. Wee say the generall includeth euery particular Phi. How could Paul make Peter a subiect to Princes when Peter was none Theo. Why shoulde not Peter bee subiect to Princes when God himselfe pronounced by the mouth of Paul that euery soule was subiect to them Phi. Who euer constred S. Pauls words so besides you Theo. The Church of Christ neuer constred them otherwise Peter and the Bishoppes of Rome for the first three hundred yeeres did they not patiently submit themselues as subiects to those punishments and torments which heathen Princes inflicted on other Christians Phi. In deede they were martyred for the most part by the rage of Infidels that knewe them not Theo. And the Christians that knewe them neuer tooke armes to defend thē against the rage of Infidels but thought them subiect to higher powers by force of S. Pauls words as well as all other Bishoppes were Phi. They might not resist though they were wrongfully vexed Theo. And why might they not but because they were subiect by Gods ordinance to the Princes power Unlawfull violence might well bee resisted Phi. Christian Princes were neuer superiours to the Bishoppes of Rome Theo. Syr your courage is more than your cunning The Bishops of Rome for eight hundred and fiftie yeres after Christ that we can directly proue were duetifull and obedient subiects to Christian Emperours Phi. Are you not ashamed to tell such a tale Theo. Will you be ashamed of your error if I proue it a trueth Phi. Shewe mee that and I will yeeld the rest Theo. The rest is alreadie proued and this shall be presently shewed I might alleage that after the Romane Emperours began to professe the name of Christ Iulius and Liberius were banished by Constantius Bonifacius the first by Honorius Syluerius and Vigilius by Iustinian Martyne the first by Constantine the thirde and diuers other Popes by sundrie Princes but that I will skippe come to the submission of Leo the fourth made to Ludouike the West Emperour with these wordes If we haue done any thing otherwise than well and not dealt vprightly with those that are vnder vs wee will amend all that is amisse by the iudgement of your highnes beseeching your excellencie to sende for the better triall of these surmises such as in the feare of God may narrowly sift not onely the matters infourmed but all our doings great and smal as well as if your Maiestie were present so that by lawfull examination all may bee finished and nothing left vndiscussed or vndetermined In all things great and small the Pope
like danger Phi. Succession alone is not sufficient to keepe men in the right faith Theo. If you ioyne trueth and holines with it as Ireneus doth no doubt they bee markes of faithfull and Godly Pastours but succession of it selfe doth neither priuilege the Teachers from error nor conduct their hearers vnto trueth because there haue beene thousands in the Church whose opinions you may not alow though you cannot disproue their elections Phi. Admit that and how then Theo. If Bishops singled may erre why not Bishops assembled which you call Councels What assurance hath their meeting to keepe them from erring Phi. The promise of our Lord where there be two or three gathered in my name there am I in the midst of them Theo. Doth our Sauiour speake only of Bishops and Councels or els of all faythful persons resorts gathered to prayer preaching or any other good intent Phi. The wordes be general and therefore belong as wel to councels as other conuents Theo. Indeed the words be generall and therefore belong no more to Councels than to any other Christian Conuents And did they specially pertain to Councels as they do not a Councell of two or three by the purport of the very wordes hath as much assurance of trueth as a Councel of three hundered It is not the number but the name in which they be gathered that guydeth and directeth them vnto trueth Phi. If our Lord haue promised to assist three gathered in his name howe much more will hee assist three hundered Theo. And yet three may see the trueth when three hundred may misse it Which I speake not to deface religious and Godly Councels but to stay the multitude from presuming their fansies to bee true religion when they bee nothing neere Phi. May Councels erre Theo. Why not Phi. What Councels Theo. Yea Councels Rebaptising of heretikes was defended by Cyprian and a Councel of Bishops with him and as Eusebius reporteth out of Dionysius decreed In maximis Episcoporum Synodis in very great Councels of Bishops The Arrians in twentie sixe yeres gathered and framed sundrie Councels for their purpose at Tyrus Ierusalem Philippi Sirmium Ariminum Seleucia Cōstantinople and two at Antioch In the Councel of Millan Aboue three hundered of the west Bishoppes consented that Athanasius should be thrust from his Bishoprike and only fiue sayd nay To the wicked edict of Basiliscus against the Councel of Chalcedon subscribed fiue hundred Bishops Gregorie Nazianzene was so out of loue with the Councels of his time that when he was sent for he praied Proropius to haue excused to the Emperour for sicknes and addeth I to write you the trueth am determined to forbeare all Councels of Bishops because I haue not seene any good euent of any Councel but rather an encrease than a redresse of our euils So that a number of badde Bishops may doe much hurt euen in Councels and the better part is not alwaies sure to be the greater Phi. Particular Councels haue erred but neuer generall Theo. If particular councels may erre why may not general what differēce find you between Prouinciall and general Councels but only the number of Persons that bee called and places whence they bee called Now what warrant I pray you haue three hundered Bishops more than two hundered or the Bishops of some countries more than the Bishops of other Countries that they cannot erre If trueth goe by tale particular Councels haue often matched and passed many generall for number of Bishops The second and sixt generall Councels had present at either but one hundered fiftie Bishops the third had but one hundered as Beda writeth and as it appeareth by their subscriptions not aboue one hundered fiftie whereas the Councel of Sardica had three hundred and so had the councel of Millan and the fourth sixt Councels of Carthage had aboue two hundered Bishops in either of them If it goe by countries then shew vs which Countries haue this priuiledge that their Bishops can not erre and which haue it not For as yet we see no cause why trueth should be tied to some numbers or nations and not to others and before we may grant them that progatiue we must see great cause and good proofe Phi. Wee doe not hold that generall Councels are defended from error by reason of any number or nations there gathered but it is wee say more likelie that many men assembled out of diuers nations shoulde light on trueth than a fewe out of one Theo. You come with likelyhoodes when wee seeke for certaineties Can you shew forth any graunt from God that generall Councels shall not erre Phi. If generall Councels might erre the church might erre which is not possible Theo. As though none were of or in the Church but onely Bishope or all the Bishops of Christendome without exception were euer present at any Councel or the greater part of those that are present might not strike the stroake without the rest When 300. are assembled in Councel and 149. take one part and 151. the other is this your profound learning that the odde voyces which make vp the greater part can neuer erre or doth the whole Church erre when falsehood hath for her selfe tenne or twelue Bishops more than trueth hath Phi. If a Councel once geue iudgement in matters of fayth who can reuerse it Theo. The rest present or absent may lawfully contradict the Councel if it wade besides trueth or against the faith When the fathers in the great Councel of Nice were about to decree that Bishops Priestes and Deacons should not vse their wiues Paphnutius alone rose vp in the midst of their Councel and freely contradicted it The same Paphnutius when secrete enemies laboured in the Councel of Tyrus wrongfully to depose Athanasius caught Maximus the Bishop of Ierusalem by the hand and willed him to rise and forsake that conuenticle of euill men In the Councel of Millan when 300. had consented to the deposition of Athanasius Dionysius Eusebius Paulinus Lucifer and Rhodamus but fiue against fifteene skore openly and plainly withstood it The second Councell of Ephesus was reiected by many godly Bishoppes that were not present as iniurious and wicked and Leo himselfe writeth of the famous and generall councell of Chalcedon Tanquam refutari nequeat quod illicite voluerit multitudo as though that might not bee refused which a multitude hath vnlawfully decreed And making there no more account of their number though there were aboue sixe hundred fathers in that Councel he saith Nulla sibimet de multiplicatione congregationis Concilia blandiantur Let no councels flatter themselues with the great number of persons assembled Phi. You are the first that euer were of this opinion that generall Councels might erre Theo. Your owne fellowes haue beene of that opinion before vs. Panormitane the best of your canonists and Proctour for Pope
after they were indued with the power of the holy Ghost from aboue was assured truth void of all error the same spirit ruling their tongues that guided their pens But this priuilege to teach and write trueth without error was annexed to Peters person not conueied along to his successors no more thā their writings are canonicall because his were Phi. This was not the priuilege of S. Peters person but of his office that he should not faile in faith The. If you ment that other Apostles which were of the same office with him were to haue the same priuilege as well as he you saide right for the churches of Christ in all places where Peter neuer preached needed the same assurance of faith the same direction vnto trueth that the churches did which were planted by Peter But you will haue this priuilege remaine to some successor after Peters death and for that you shew vs no authority besides your owne which God knoweth is very simple Phi. Al the fathers applie this priuilege of not failing in faith to the Romane church Peters successours in the same Theo. You belie all the Fathers with one breath but that you haue a priuilege to say what you list in other men this were an arrogant an impudent lie What fathers I praie you applie this promise of not failing in faith to the Romane Church You say al for discharge of your credit let vs heare some Phi. S. Barnard writing to Pope Innocentius saith To what other See was it euer said I haue praied for thee Peter that thy faith do not faile Theo. Could you find no father for the space of 1100. yeres that euer applied these wordes to the church of Rome before Bernard To be plaine with you masters Bernard is too yōg to cary the name of antiquitie too single to haue the credit of al the fathers But with thē that haue no mo one must go for all Indeed all the fathers that euer applied this priuilege to the church of Rome are poore Bernard more than a 1000. yeres after Christ in the midst of corruption but in this case wee require some grauer and elder father than Bernard Phi. To the which saith S. Cyprian infidelity or false saith can not come Theo. To which what church or successors Phi. Which you wil. And where you require fathers that the church of Rome can not er Cypriās words be very plaine Post ista nauigare audent ad Petri cathedram atque ecclesiam Principalem vnde vmtas Sacerdotalis exorta est a schismaticis profanis literas ferre nec cogitare eos esse Romanos quorū fides Apostolo praedicante laudata est ad quos persidia habere non possit accessum After al this they dare saile cary letters frō schismatiks profane persons to the chaire of Peter the principal church whence priestly vnity had her beginning do not remēber the Romanes to be those whose faith was praised by the Apostles mouth to whom infidelity cā not come Theo. You do wel to repeate the place at large it wil ease me of some paines What conclude you of these words Phi. That the Bishop of Rome can not er Theo. How fet you that about Phi. To Peters chaire infidelitie can not come Theo. Those be not Cypriās words Phi. To the Romanes he saith infidelity cā not come Theo. He addeth somwhat more whose faith was praised by the Apostles mouth Phi. All the better For if S. Paul praised their faith it was the truer Theo. But whose faith did Paul praise the Bishops or the peoples Phi. Why aske you that Theo. Because that directeth the sense of Cyprians words Phi. Whose say you Theo. I aske you you returne it to me Well then let S. Paul speake for vs both I thanke my God through Iesus Christ for you all because your faith is renoumed throughout the whole world You al containeth as well the people that receiued the faith as the Preachers that taught it and of the twaine rather the people than the Preachers because the preaching of the faith was as true elsewhere as in Rome but either the zeale deuotion of the people in receiuing the faith was greater at Rome than elsewhere as S. Hierom noteth that S. Paul commendeth or else because their citie was imperiall the fame of their receiuing the gospel was bruted farther abroad thā of other smaler cities did incourage others to go forward with the more boldnes for the which Paul thāketh God Take which you wil the peoples faith is it that S. Paul praiseth as his own words witnesse To you all that are at Rome I thanke my God for you all because your faith is made manifest to al the world Now if Cyprian say that infidelity can not come to the Romanes whose saith was praised by the Apostles mouth then can none of the people of Rome erre because the faith of them all was praised by the Apostles mouth Phi. The church of Rome can not erre nor the people neither so long as they follow the faith of that church Theo. But if you build this on Cyprians words you must say that the church of Rome can not erre so long as shee followeth the people of Rome for their faith was praised by the Apostle And therefore choose whether you will impart this priuiledge to euery Citizen and Artisant in Rome that they can not erre as well as to the Pope that hee can not erre or else seeke for an other meaning of Cyprians saying Phi. What other meaning should we seeke for be not the wordes plaine enough Theo. You neither translate them right nor applie them right For Cyprian doth not discourse in that epistle whether the Romanes them-selues may fall from the faith but whether wicked persons reiected in other places from the communion should haue any refuge or find any fauour at Rome that he largely dissuadeth bringing this amongst others for a reason that where the Apostle praised the people of Rome in his time for their zealous imbracing the faith of Christ and incouraging others to doe the like it would nowe bee a great shame if wicked disturbers of the faith should bee succoured by them which he thought good to expresse in these words Neither doe they remember the Romanes to bee those whose faith was praised by the Apostles mouth to whom wickednes or vnfaithfulnesse may not haue accesse Phi. Out vpon you what a gloze haue you brought vs here Theo. None but such as the whole Epistle shal iustifie Phi. You translate non possit may not Theo. A foule ouersight I assure you as though the very children in Grammer scholes did not learne that posse doth signifie to may or can or your law it selfe did not allow vs that exposition when it saith Id dicimur posse quod de iure possumus we can
fastned on the Apostles and Churches of Christ against al trueth the legates of Adrian in this very Synode conuince of a manifest and mightie corruption in the wordes that be most materiall for your purpose Phi. Did the legates of Adrian contradict their masters allegation Theo. The same place being rehearsed by Demetrius a Notarie out of the booke it selfe which the legates of Rome offered in the councel sounded farre otherwise than Adrian had cited it For where Adrian in his letters alleaged Hoc enim traditum nobis ab Apostolis non est prohibendum This being deliuered vs by the Apostles must not be prohibited the booke which they read had Hoc enim nobis a sanctis Apostolis non est prohibitum this is not forbidden vs by the Apostles It is one thing to say The Apostles did deliuer it an other to say The Apostles did not prohibite it Betweene these two reports if you weigh them wâ—ll you shall finde good difference Phi. If you like not the former reading take the latter and that in sight is true For the Apostles in particular woordes did not prohibite the making and worshipping of holy Images Theo. They needed not God by his Lawe long before had doone it very sufficiently and that standing in full force there needed no newe prohibition since no authoritie coulde bee greater than his who had already forbidden it And yet by your leaue the Apostles did not onely propose the whole Lawe of God as holy iust and good but they namely touch the seconde precept which wee reason of Saint Paul confessing the Iewes did well according to the Lawe to abhorre Idoles and that the Gentiles were giuen ouer to their vile affections for turning the glorie of God to the Image of a man and S. Iohn requiring all christians to beware the like in sayâ—ng Babes keepe your selues from Idoles Phi. FroÌ„ idoles but not from images Theo. An Image made with hands if it be set vp to God himselfe worshipped is an idole as I haue proued therfore you must either renouÌ„ce your adoring of images which your forged Basil would establish or else suffer theÌ„ to stand for Idoles from which S. Iohn deterreth vs. Phi. S. Augustine saith it is not an Idole except it bâ— Dei falsi alieni simulachrum the image of a false strange God And in that respect you do the Images of Christ his Saints great wrong to call them idoles Theo. S. Augustine in that place disputeth how Gedeons Ephod should be said in the scripture to be fornication in the people the destruction of Gedeons house since it was as he thought no likenes of any thing against the lawe but an imitation of the Priests apparell prescribed in the Law And albeit to interprete himself what he ment when he said it was no idole he addeth by way of explicatioÌ„ that is no shape of any false or strange God yet doth he not limit the word to that continual vse but rather granteth as his conclusioÌ„ sheweth that there were mo kindes of Idoles that this though it were a garment in the law not an Image against the law yet was it in sort an Idole so his words import FactuÌ„ est Gedeon domini eius in scandolum quia hoc quoddaÌ„ genus Idoli quodaÌ„modo erat This was the ruine of Gedeon his house because it was in some sense a kind of idole Tertullian wil tel you the word is general noteth the likenes or shape of any thing 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 graecè formam sonat ab â—oper diminutionem 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 aequé apud nos formulam fecit Igitur omnis forma vel formula Idolum se dici exposcit This word 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 in greeke signifieth a shape whence 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 is deriued as a diminutiue and with vs signifieth any likenes therefore euery shape or likenes may wel bee called an Idole Isidor repeating Tertullians words as worth the noting addeth of his owne Idolum est simulachrum quod humana effigie factum consecratum est An Idole is an Image made after the shape of a man and dedicated vnto some religious vse Philand Nay dedicated vnto some false God and then it is rightly an Idole Theoph. But Isidore sayth generally that an image consecrated is an idole and consecration is the addicting of any thing to holy and diuine vses Phi. That is not Isidores meaning Theo. Those be Isidores words Phi. You heard S. Augustine say it must bee the Image of a false GOD. Theo. S. Augustine doth not tie the word to that signification as you heard by his owne confession and yet if you take false and straunge Gods as S. Augustine doeth your adoration of painted and carued Images will prooue them to bee false Christes and your selues to bee worshippers of false Goddes For if you worshippe Christ not after his will but after your conceite you woorshippe nowe not Christ but the fiction and imagination of your own heartes and that is a false Christ as Saint Augustine learnedly and truely teacheth Quisquis talem cogitat Deum qualis non est Deus alienum Deum vtique falsum in cogitatione portat Whosoeuer supposeth God to bee that hee is not beareth a straunge and false GOD in his cogitation This else-where hee calleth the Idole of the heart not onely in Pagans but also in Christians Of the false fansies that Pagans had of GOD hee sayth Prius id agimus vt Idola in eorum cordibus confringamus The first thing that wee labour is to breake downe those Idoles in their heartes Of the wrong imaginations of christians hee saith Quae omnia Idola cordis sunt all which are Idoles of the heart Phi. A false opinion of his essence is an Idole in the heart of man Theo. And so is a wrong perswasion of his will or woorship Hierom sayth Vsque hodie in domo Dei quae interpretatur ecclesia siue in corde animaque credentium ponitur Idolum quando nouum dogma constituitur Euen to this present day an Idole is set vp in the house of God which is interpreted to be the Church or else in the hearts and soules of the beleeuers when a newe point of Doctrine is deuised And therefore generally resolueth of all errors Quod omne dogma contrarium veritati adoret opera manuum suarum constituat Idola in terra sua that euery opinion repugnant to truth worshippeth the works of his own hands and erecteth an Idole in the land where it is By the workes of their owne hands hee meaneth the deuises of their hearts as else where he sheweth Haeretici perdito mentis iudicio adorant Idola quae de corde suo finxerunt Heretikes with their wicked resolution of mynd or else void of sense and feeling of mynde adore the Idoles which they haue framed in
cut off al ambiguities we haue the plaine testimonie of Gregorie the great that the Church of Rome 600. yeres after Christ knew nothing of those constitutions and Church seruices which are now obtruded vnder the Apostles names Mos Apostolorum fuit vt ad ipsam solummodo orationem Dommicam oblationis hostiam consecraret This was saith he the maner of the Apostles to consecrate the sacrifice with saying no moe praiers but the Lords praier In vaine therefore doe you dreame of a settled forme of praier for the Lords supper where as the Apostles haue none but left that to the direction and disposition of the holy Ghost inspiring the ministers and elders in euery Church when the faithful were assembled to make their praiers vnto god with the people and to render him thankes for all his mercies as the spirite gaue them vtterance This Chrysostome calleth Precandi domum the miraculous gift of praiers whereof S. Paul speaketh in this place and Tertul. seemeth to meÌ„tion the same in his Apologie for the Christians as during in the Church vnto his time We saith he looking vp to heauen with our hands stretched out as being innocent bareheaded as not ashamed sine monitore quia de pectore oramus make our praiers without any prompter as comming from the free motion of our own harts Phi. Our arguments conuince that S. Paul spake not of the Churches seruice and till those be answered we cannot change our minds Theo. That which I haue alreadie saide openeth your error in mistaking or els peruerting the wordes of S. Paul choose you whether if that content you not repeate your reasons as they stand in rew that we may see their force Phi. It is euident the Corinthians had their Seruice in Greeke at this same time and â—t was not done in these miraculous toungs Nothing is ment then of the church seruice Theo. To vs it is out of question that the Corinthians had their publike prayers and exhortations in the Greeke tongue because the common people of that City vnderstood none other and the tongue which they vnderstoode not might not be vsed in the Church by S. Pauls rule but you that denie S. Paul to speak of the Church seruice in this place howe prooue you the Corinthians had their Seruice in the Greeke tongue Phi. Doe you thinke they had not Theo. For our parts as I tolde you we are resolued because S. Paul would neither haue preaching nor praying in the Church but such as might edifie addeth that an vnknown tongue profiteth nothing to edificatioÌ„ mary you are otherwise minded and therefore I see not howe you can proue that they had their seruice in the Greeke tongue which you affirme to be euident Phi. Had they their Seruice trow you in an vnknowne tongue Theo. In your opinion that is no such absurdity Phi. They could not vnderstand it except it were in Greeke Theo. This is contrary to your owne Principles For the Hebrewe Greeke and Latine as you told vs euen nowe were vnderstoode of the cyuill people in euery great Citie and were that vntrue as I know it is though you auouched it for an aduantage yet is it not necessarie to vnderstand our prayers as your selues defend in this your declaration vpon S. Paul and following the path that you leade vs in your Rhemish obseruations wee say you can not prooue the Corinthians had their seruice in the Greeke tongue Philand In what tongue else coulde they haue it Theoph. Rather in Hebrewe than in Greeke for that tongue was sacred and naturall to the Iewes who first spred the Gospel and planted the Churches Phi. The Apostle requireth the people shoulde vnderstande the prayers of the Church otherwise they reape no profite by them and to speake Hebrewe in the Church to them that vnderstood nothing but Greeke were no reason Theo. Are you there at host now Can you plea thus on both sides when you be vrged You are making inuincible arguments that the Apostle speaketh nothing in this place of the Churches seruice before you can iustifie the first proposition which you bring you bee faine to take hold of this very place to prooue the Corinthians had their Church seruice in Greeke Phi. Nay without this place it is euident they had their seruice in greeke The. Set this chapter aside and if you prooue the Corinthians had their seruice in Greeke at this very time when the Apostle wrate wee giue you the cause Phi. You be resolued they had and yet you put vs to prooue it as if it were in doubt Theo. I tel the reason It is euident they had their seruice in a knowen tongue by that which the Apostle here writeth otherwise it is not euident by any other proofe that you can make And since you will haue the Apostle to speake nothing of the Church Seruice in this chapter why shoulde wee not put you to prooue that which you lay for the ground of your misconstring Saint Pauls text Phi. A trueth it is what proofe soeuer may or may not be brought for it Theo. Let it stand for trueth what will you conclude Phi. Nothing is meant then of their Church Seruice Theo. Why so Phi. That was in Greeke and well vnderstood of all the people Theo. A worthy sequele As if it were not possible for some vaine men to disturbe the Church of Corinth notwithstanding the Apostle had left generall direction that al things should be doone in the church vnto edification The Lordes supper was rightly deliuered them was it therefore not abused by some amongst them The like say we for their praiers in the church No doubt Paul ordained at Corinth as he did in al other churches of the Saincts that the people should say Amen to euery blessing and thankesgiuing that was vsed in the Church Might not therfore some of their Elders and ministers to venditate themselues and the gift which they had of God sometimes blesse and make their praiers at the Lords table in a tongue not vnderstoode of the whole multitude Phi. Were they strangers or inhabitants Theo. It skilleth not whether they might bee either Phi. Inhabitants there would vse none other toung than their owne and strangers might not minister Sacramentes in other mens Churches Theo. Some of their own might be so vain glorious as in making their praiers at the Lordes table which was then doone by hart and not after any prescribed order or form to shew the gift of tongues which they receiued of the holy Ghost to an other end and not to commend them-selues without edifiing the hearer Strangers also if they were in place were suffered both to teach and blesse in the Church as well as others that were tied to their Cures by reason that many were sent by the Apostles and by the holy Ghost to visite the Churches and comfort the Christians as they traueled and such were according to their
tēporall 249 The Prince charged to plant the faith and rule the church 250 The King of Englands charge 250 The Prince charged with Godlinesse 251 Their power is equall with their charge 252 The sword prohibited vnto Bishops 253 Only princes beare the sworde 254 The words of the oth 254 Supreme concluded out of saint Paul 255 The Apostles subiect vnto Princes 255 Suffering is a sign of subiection 256. The direction of the sword 257 Who shall direct the sword 257 No man Iudge of trueth 258 Discerners of trueth 259 The people are charged to discern the truth 260 The people must discerne teachers and try spirits 261 We be not bound to the Bishops pleasure 262 Wherein Bishops are superiour to Princes 263 The function not the person 264 The priests person subiect to the Prince 264 The right direction vnto trueth 265. The best direction for Princes 266. Who shall direct Princes 267. Successiō is no sure directiō 268 Bishops may erre 26◠Councels may erre 270 276 Number no warrant for trueth 270 Councels haue erred 272 Consent without staggering due only to the Scriptures 276 The Pope may erre 277.304.311 Christ praied for Peter 278 Peter failed in faith 279 Christ praied for all 280 No one set ouer the Church 281 The Romane Church may faile in faith 283 Cyprians place discussed 283 The misconstering of Non potest 284 Cyprians opinion of the Romanes 286 S. Pauls warning to them 286 S. Ierome misconstered 287 The Romanes may erre 288 Moses chaire might erre 289 The high Priests did erre 290 Christs promise to his Church 291 The godly may erre 292 S. Iohns words abused 293 The whole Church erreth not 294. The Iesuites condemned for flatterers by their owne fellowes 294 What Popes haue erred 296 Liberius an heretike 297 Honorius an heretike 299 Vigilius an heretike 301 Anastasius an heretike 302 Shiftes to saue the Popes from erring 303 Caiphas free from error 305 Caiphas as free from error as the Pope 305 The Popes tribunall hath erred 306 Vaine mockeries of the Iesuites to saue the Popes error 309 Their owne Church confesseth the Pope may erre 310 The iudge of faith must not erre 312 The contents of the third part The Pope hath no power to depriue the Prince 314 What God hath allowed to Princes the Pope cannot take from them 317 Princes not depriuable by the Pope 318 The Prophets deposed no Princes 319 Saul reiected by God not deposed by Samuell 320 Saul depriued of the succession not of the possession of the Crowne 321 Dauid annointed to succeed 325 Ieroboam plagued not deposed 325 Prophets may threaten 326 Vzziah stricken with the leprosie not assaulted with violence 327 Lepers seuered from mens cōpany but not disherited 328 Vzziahs pride 329 Athalia slaine 329. Achab reprooued not deposed 330. Elias induced the King and the people to kill Baals prophets 331 Elias no executioner 332 Fier frō heauen at Elias word 332. Iehu willed by God to take the sworde 333 Elizeus deposed no King 333 No Scripture confirmeth the deposition of princes 334 Kinges holde their dignities of God not of priests 335 The priest no Iudge of the princes crowne 336 The priest to direct the Iudge to decide 338 Princes not subiect to priestes 339. Princes depriued priests 340 Princes brake couenaunts with God and yet were not deposed 341 No prince deposed in the olde testament 341 Christ is King of Kinges but not the pope 342 Christ haue many prerogatiues which the pope may not haue 343 Binding of sinnes not of Scepters 344 Depriuing is not feeding 345 Temporall reuenge not lawfull for priests 445 Heretikes must not be saluted yet princes must be obeyed 346. Heretiks must haue their du 347 Society not duty prohibited 348 Wee must shunne the wicked but not disobeie the magistrate 348 Excommunication inferreth no deposition 350 The Iesuites claime temporall and externall power for the pope 350.351 God not Paul stroke Elima◠blinde 352 What is ment in S. Paul by deliuering vnto Sathan 353 The Apostles laid violēt hands on no man 354 The goods and bodies of men are Cesars right 355 Priests no Iudges of temporall thinges but makers of peace betweene brethren 357 The temporall and spiritual distinct regiments 358 The Ciuill state directed not punished by the spiritual 359 Princes committed to the preachers charge not subiected to the popes court 360 Princes may be put in mind of their duties 361 Nazianzene subiect to the prince 361 Howe the preacher correcteth 362 Howe manie degrees the pope will be aboue the prince 363 If he heare not the Church let him be to thee as an Ethnick 364 Ethnicks must not be deposed 364 The Church cannot depose the prince 365 The Church submitted herselfe to Princes 366 The Church hath no commissiō to depose Princes 367 The church with thē is the Pope 367 Neuer king obayed the Popes Censure 368 The Church neuer decreed that Popes should depose Princes 368 Impertinent examples 369 Excommunication is not deposition 370 The fact of Babylas 371 Babylas died vnder Decius 371 The Prince penitent for his sins 372 S. Ambrose and Theodosius 373 Anastasius excommunicatiō vncertaine 374 Michaels excommunication vnproued 374 Lotharius mistaken 375 Of seuen examples but one proued 375 S. Austens opinion of such excommunications 376 The end of excommunication ceaseth in Princes 376 The Church praied for tyrants 377 The Church praied for the welfare of hereticall Princes 378 The Church praied for Constantius 378 A lustie leape from the keyes to the sword 379 Rebellion against Princes defended to be iust and honourable warres 380 Graund theeues murtherers 381 The Popes warrant to rebels 381 The Pope cānot warrant Rebellion 382 Scriptures abused to serue Rebellion 383 Asa remoued his mother from her dignitie 383 The Iudiciall part of Moses Law is ceased 384 The execution of Moses Law cōmitted to none but to the magistrate 384 No reuenger but the Magistrate 384 Phinees fact had Moses warrant 385 Moses a magistrate and no priest after Aarons order 386 Moses a Leuite but no priest 387 Moses a Prophet no sacrificing Priest 388 And so was Samuel 389 Many offred that wer no priests 389 Sauls sin was infidelitie 389 The Priest did not appoint the wars 390 The warres of Abiah 391 Edome Libnah reuolting 391. Ten tribes might fight with two 392 The Church of Christ neuer alowed rebellion 392 S. Basil alowed not the people to rebel for his defence 393 S. Ambrose alowed no tumult at Millan in fauour of him 394. Athanasius did not stirre Constance against Constantius 396 Athanasius neuer spake euill of Constantius 396 Athanasius neuer disobaied Cōstantius 397 Athanasius would not haue the people rebel for his cause 398 The tumult at Alexandria for Peter against Lucius 399 Atticus harboured strangers but not armed subiects against their Princes 400 The Persian war was lawful 400 What Leo requested of the Emperour 401 The Christians were subiect to Iulian though he were an
The Popes power ouer Princes vsurped Rom. 13. Supreme is a manifest deduction out of S. Paul Supreme ouer Persons not ouer things We may not limit where we will obey the sword where not Where they may commaund we must obey We may not resist them but with reuerence indure them though they coÌ„mand against God and his truth Heathen Tyraunts had power of the sword ouer Christ and his Apostles Christ submitted himselfe to the Magistrate So Paul Peter both did and taught 1. Pet. 4. Rom. 13. Whom we must indure in that which is euill those must we obey in that which is good Aug. Epist. 50. Idem Epist. 166. The summe of the doctrine which we teach concerning the Princes supremacie The Iesuites iestes wherewith they mocke the Reader THE DIRECTION of PRINCES VNTO TRVETH Princes must take good care to come by faithfull direction The right directors vnto truth must be discerned by their doctrine not by their dignitie No mortall man may Iohn 14. 1. Iohn 5. * Iohn 5. 8. De Nuptijs ad Valentin lib. 2. â—ap 33. Optat. lib. 5. ad â—ermenianum Iohn 17. Bishops no iudges of the word of God The church is not iudge of the Scriptures Iohn 10. * Iames 4. Aust. in Psal. 2. * Idem de vera religione ca. 31. * Idem confess lib. 13. cap. 23. * Contra Cresc lib. 2. cap. 31. Idem Epist. 19. ad Hieronym Iudging taken for discerning Onely God must limit what is truth what error To discerne truth belongeth to all God willeth all men to trie spirites 1. Iohn 4. Matth. 7. And to discerne false teachers Iohn 10. The people must discerne teachers by their doctrine 1. Corinth 10. 1. Corinth 11. * Matth. 24. Colos. 8. Ephes. 5. 1. Iohn 3. * Heb. 5. 1. Corinth 14. Orig in Jeâ—â—â— Naue hom 2. The Fathers referred them selues to the iudgement of the hearers Ambros. Epi. li. 5. orat in Aux Luke 10. Matt. 10. The people haue libertie to discerne and charge to beware seducers Matth. 24. Matth. 23. The people not bound to beleeue the Pharisees doctrine except it accorded to the law of God Aug. in Iohan. tractat 46. Matth. 16. Ibidem vers 11â— 1. Iohn 4. 1. Thes. 5. Rom. 12. Philip. 1. 1. Corinth 2. The whole Scriptures giue the people leaue to discerne the truth and require them so to do Princes haue the same libertie to discerne trie spirites that priuate men haue The former precepts comprise the Prince aswell as the people Heb. 13. Vers. 7. No man bouÌ„d to the Preacher farther than he speaketh truth The Apostles tied to that condition 1. Pet. 1. * 1. Iohn 1. 1. Corinth 4. Galat. 1. The Angels themselues limited to that rule 1. Corinth 7. 1. Corinth 17. Chrysost. in 1. cap. 2. Epist. ad Timoth. hom 2. * Tertul. de praescript advers haereticâ—s * Chrysost. operis imperfect hom 20. in 7. ca. Mat. Much more teachers that are but seruantes of the law and therfore bouÌ„d vnto the law Princes must obey Bishops because they speak in Gods name and not in their owne Act. 20. Bishops haue commission to feede not to rule their flocks 1. Pet. 5. Iohn 21. They be superiour in teaching not in power to commaund and punish Their functioÌ„ is more perfect excellent because God worketh by their hands and mouthes Aug. contra Crescon lib. 4. cap. 6. Aug. in Psa. 10 In 1. cap. 2. epist. ad Tim. hom 2. De spiritu san lib. 3. cap. 19. 1. Corin. 1. 1. Corin. 3 The word sacramentes serue not to aduaunce the Preachers person The Preachers cal for subiection reuerence to their master not to themselues * 2. Corinth 4. * Mark 10. â— Corint 9. The trueth of God is tied to no certaine persons nor places Peters fayth is trueth in deede but that must be taken out of his owne writings not other mens reports No successour may be trusted against or besides the Apostles writings No poynt of fayth vnwritten Rom. 10. Basil. in sermone de fide Idem in Ethiciâ— definiâ— 8. Hilar. ad Constantium August Idem de Trinit lib. 9. Hieron aduersus Helnidium IdeÌ„ in Psal. 86. Tertul. de praescript aduers. haereticoâ— Idem aduersus HermogeneÌ„ Ambros. de virginibus li. 3. Ireneus lib. 3. cap. 1. Cyril de recta fide ad Reginas lib. 2. August de Pastoribus cap. 11. Idem contra literas Petiliani lib. 3. cap. 6. Caus. 11. quaest 3. § si is qui preaest No person nor place may be trusted in matters of faith besides and without the scriptures The best direction for Princes is the word of God Psal. 118. Deut. 17. Deut. 12. Esai 8. Luk. 16. Hieron Cap. 1. in epist. ad Galatas Tertullian de praescriptionib Tertullian vâ— supra Heretikes therfore couet a shew of scriptures because they be the grouÌ„ds of all trueth No tribunall on earth to the which trueth is fastned Where trueth is in doubt the Church is in more doubt The shepheards voice is not knoweÌ„ by the sheepe but the sheep by hearing the sheepheards voice * Iohn 10. Apolog. Cap. 4. sect 28. Succession is no sure direction vnto trueth Ireneus lib. 4. Cap. 43. Cap. 44. Cap. 45. Act. 20. Mat. 7. 2. Pet. 2. 2. Cor. 11. 2. Cor. 11. Bishops haue beene heretikes Bishops asseÌ„bled may erre as wel as Bishops seuered Mat. 18. Two or three haue the same promise of assistance that two or three huÌ„dred haue Councels may erre Euseb. lib. 7. cap. 5. * Sozom. lib. 4. cap. 9. * Euag. li. 3. ca. 4. Epist. 55 ad Proropium A generall Councel doth not differ froÌ„ a particular but only in number of persons and places Vide distinct 16 § sexta § primo * Tomo concil primo * Socrat. lib. 1. cap. 2. * Idem li. 2. c. 36. Tomo concilior primo A generall Councel erring the Church doth not erre A Councell may be reuersed by the rest that be present or absent Sozo li. 1. ca. 23. Sozo li. 2. ca. 25. Sozo li. 4. ca. 9. Leo epist. 52. ad Anatholium Ibidem Their own fellowes haue consessed that general councels might er Panor de elect electi potestate ¶ significasti Panorm IbideÌ„ A generall councel is not the Church Pigh hierarch ecclesiast lib. 6. cap. 5 4. Pighius is earnest that general CouÌ„cels haue erred in decisioÌ„ of faithes Lib. 6. Cap. 7. Lib. 6. Cap. 13. August de baptist lib. 2 cap. 3. S. Augustine confesseth that councels may erre Ibidem The second Councell of Ephesus was generall * Astio. 1. * Euagrius li. 1. Cap. 10. Reperitur chalcedonens concil actio 1. Chalced. concil actio 1. Ecclesiasticall iudges are often deceiued Contra Crescon lib. 2. cap. 21. August epist. 167. August contra Maximinum lib. 3. cap. 14. Ibidem lib. 3 cap. 14. The Arrians not bound to the authoritie of the Nicene councel The Councell of Ariminum was generall Socrat. lib. 2.
Christ to teach and baptise all nations without exceptioÌ„ but we say none hath at this present nor ought to haue any such power within the Realme and vnlesse you will defende that soules in heauen doe nowe preach the Gospel and minister the Sacramentes we see not how the Apostles haue any actuall function or ecclesiasticall power on earth here or elsewhere These quarrels full of spite and voide of al trueth and common reason doe more than you thinke impaire the credit of your religion and learning but so great is your malice that it shutteth your senses kindleth your cholor whiles you would say somwhat to say you care not what be it neuer so vntrue or vntidy Phi. The Princes soueraignty is directly against the commandement commission giuen to Peter first then to all the Apostles of preaching baptising remitting retaining binding loosing ouer all the world without difference of temporall state or dependance of any mortall Prince therein Theo. That coÌ„mandement promise of our Sauior to his Apostles is no way preiudiciall to our doctrine nor beneficial to yours as also the charge which the preachers bishops of England haue ouer their flocks proceedeth neither from Prince nor Pope nor dependeth vpon the wil or word of any earthly creature therfore you do vs the more wrong so confidently to say what you list of vs as if your enuious reports were authentik oracles Phi. You make the Prince supreme gouernor in al spiritual ecclesiasticall thinges causes preaching baptising binding loosing such like be spiritual things causes ergo you make the Princes supreme gouernor euen in these things And here you may see that we iustly charge you with all the former absurdities though to shift theÌ„ vs off you say we do nothing but slander cauil Theo. And here you may see the truth of our speech vniustnes of your charge that as you began so you coÌ„tinue with spite full peâ—â—erting deprauing our words For by GOVERNORS we do not mean moderators perscribers directors inuentors or authors of these things as you misconster vs but rulers magistrates bearing the sworde to permit defende that which Christ himselfe first appointed ordained with lawfull force to disturbe the despisers of his wil testament Now what inconuenience is this if we say that Princes as publike Magistrates may giue freedom protection and assistance to the preaching of the word ministring of the Sacraments right vsing of the keies not fet licence from Rome Is that against Christs coÌ„mandement or commission giuen to Peter the rest or doth that proue all ecclesiasticall power cure of soules to proceed depend of the Princes right Phi. It keepeth the realme from obedience to general Councels which haue bin or shal be gathered in forraine countries It taketh away al conuenient meanes of gathering holding or executing any such Councels their Decrees as appeared by refusing to come to the late Councel of Trent notwithstanding the Popes messengers and letters of other great Princes which requested and inuited them to the same Theo. Princes ought to heare obey the truth proposed by priuate persons Preachers much more to reuerence the same declared by a number of faithful godly Bishops meeting in a general councel But the pleasures orders of other princes prelats be their assembly neuer so great the rulers of this realme are not bound to respect vnlesse their consents be first required and obtained Particular councels you may call without vs and as we are not acquainted with them so are we not obstricted to them Generall Councels you can not call without the liking and warning of all Christian Princes and common-wealthes and if you neglect or skippe any they may lawfully refuse and despise that which you shal then and there decree For that which pertaineth to all can not be good without the knowledge and consents of all Phi. To the Councel of Trent you were requested and inuited by messengers froÌ„ the Pope and letters of other great Princes Theo. To your Chapter at Trent we came not for many good and sufficient reasons The Pope tooke vppon him to call that Councell which he had no right to do None might haue voices in the Councel but such as were his creatures and sworne to bee true trustie to his triple crowne The conclusion and resolution of all thinges was euer reserued to him or his Legates This Realme and others were inuited to come but as suppliants to your Synod to stand at your curtesies and to suffer your selues to be iudges in your owne cause and yet you thinke much that wee refused to come Let a christian councell bee agreed on by all their consentes that haue to do with it let both sides haue like interest in the councell Let your Salua semper in omnibus Apostolicae sedis authoritate Forprising in all thinges the Popes power and pleasure be reiected and the Scriptures inspired from God be laid in the middest as the ballance and touchstone of truth which was the wont of former councels Let both partes bee sworne to respect nothing but in the feare of God to examine the faith seeke out the ancient canons of Christs church if we faile to meete you declaime against vs on Gods name as hinderers of peace despisers of general councels Otherwise no duety bindeth vs to resort much lesse to be subiect to your vnlawfull routes voide of al christian authority liberty truth indifferency Phi. Was the Councell of Trent vnlawfully called Theo. Proue it the Popes right to cal generall Councels that none must sit there but his feed sworne men lastly that he must rule raigne as he doth in all assemblies bee iudge against al law reason in his own cause though he be chiefe in resisting the truth oppressing the church then will we grant your conuenticle at TreÌ„t was orderly called But if these things be repugnant to christian equitie the sincere canons of Gods Church whereby the Catholike Councels of former ages were directed as apparently they be then had your Tridentine chapter neither the calling keeping concluding nor meaning of a generall Councel Phi. Who shoulde call Councels if not the Pope Theo. Shew what one generall Councell the Pope called for the space of twelue hundred yeares after Christ and then aske vs who should call them but he if you can not learn that vsurpation is no right and that generall Councels were called by Princes and not by Popes and therefore the Popes power to summon generall Councels if it bee any grewe very lately and is not yet olde enough to bee currant or Catholike Phi. To the Councell of Trent other Princes consented Theo. Certaine Friers were set there to wast day light wearie the wals with declaiming against the Gospell of Christ whiles your holy
father and his Cardinals were eighteene yeres prouoking working the Princes States adherent to them to spill christian blood to make hauocke of al places persons that were not â—â—â—dient to the Bishop of Rome yet you count it some great absurditie for vs to reiect this Councell as not generall Phi. You acknowledge no subiection to Councels or Tribunals abroad all other Bishops Patriarkes Apostles Christ all because they were be forrainers not hauing iurisdiction or sufficieÌ„t authoritie to define against English Sectaries or Errors And this when a Realme or Prince is in error taketh away all meanes of reducing theÌ„ to the truth againe Theo. To Christ his Apostles we acknowledge more subiection than you doe We honor adore him as the true son of God equall with his father in authority maiesty We make him no forrainer to this Realm as you do but professe him to be the only master redeemer ruler of his church as wel in this as in all other Nations To whom Princes Preachers are but seruaÌ„ts the preachers to propose the Princes to execute his will commandements whom all that wil be saued must beleeue obey aboue against all Councels Tribunals be they regall or papall if they dissent from his word The preachings writings of the Apostles we receiue with greater reuereÌ„ce exacter obedience than you do We giue no man leaue to dispence against theÌ„ which your law witnesseth of the Pope Papa coÌ„tra ApostoluÌ„ dispensat The Pope dispeÌ„seth against the Apostle We neuer said as Pigghius saith The Apostles wrote certaine things not that their writinges should bee aboue our faith and religion but rather vnder Wee confesse The Apostles were men allowed of God to whom the Gospel should be committed therefore we receiue the word from theÌ„ not as the word of man but as it is in deed the word of God assuring our selues it is the power of God to saue all that beleeue detesting your erronious and heynous presumptions that take vppon you to adde alter diminish and dispence with that which the spirite of Christ spake as well by the pennes as mouthes of the Apostles To Councels such as the Church of Christ was wont by the helpe of her religious Princes to call we owe communion and brotherly concord so long as they make no breach in faith nor in christian charitie subiection and seruitude wee owe them none the blessed Angels professe themselues to bee fellowe seruantes with the Sainctes on earth what are you then that with your Tribunals and iurisdictions woulde bee Lordes and Rulers ouer Christes inheritance Peter saith Cyprian whom the Lord made first choice of on whom he built his church when Paul after stroue with him for Circumcision did not take vpon him nor chalenge any thing insolentlie or arrogantly nor aduaunce him-selfe as Primate and one to whom the nouices and puinees shoulde bee subiect And as it were in open defiance of your Tribunals and iurisdictions which Stephen the Bishoppe of Rome began then to exercise he directeth the Bishops assembled in a Councell at Carthage on this wise It resteth that of this matter wee speake euerie one of vs what we thinke iudging no man nor remouing any man from the communion though he be not of our minde For none of vs maketh himselfe Bishop of Bishops or by terrour like a tyrant forceth his collegues to yeeld him obedience whether they will or no considering euerie Bishop by reason of his Episcopal power and freedom hath the rule of his owne iudgement as one that can not bee iudged of an other nor hee him-selfe iudge an other but let vs al expect the tribunal or iudgement of our Lord Iesus Christ which only solely hath power to set vs in the gouernment of his Church and to iudge of our actes And because you be so earnest with vs for subiection to Tribunals abroade to bee plaine with you it is boyes plaie before you name them or proue that wee owe them any subiection to skore it vppe as an absurditie that wee acknowledge none vnto them and yet least you shoulde thinke vs the first that refused Tribunals abroade you shall see that ancient and worthy fathers haue done the like before vs. What Tribunals abroade did Cyprian and the 80. Bishoppes at Carthage with him acknowledge when hee saide as you hearde Christus vnus solus habet potestatem de actu nostro iudicandi Christ only and none else hath authoritie to iudge of our act And agaiâ—e Episcopus ab alâ—o iudicari non potest cum non ipse nec alterum iudicare A Bishop may not be iudged of others nor iudge others Expectemus vniuersi iudicium Christi Let vs all both abroad and at home expect the iudgement of Christ. What Tribunals abroade did Polycrates and the Bishops of Asia with him acknowledge when hee replied to the Bishoppe of Rome threatning to excommunicate him and the rest Non turbaborijs quae terrendi gratia obijciuntur I passe not for these threats that are offered to terrifie me What Tribunals abroad did S. Aug. the 216. African Bishops acknowledge when they decreed that none Appealing ouer the Sea to Tribunals abroad should be receiued to the communion within Africa And when they repelled the Bishop of Rome laboring to place his Legates a latere within their Prouince willed him nâ—t to bring Fumosum seculi Typhum That smoky pride of the world into the Church of Christ What Tribunals abroad did the Bishop of the Britons acknowledge when they proued to August the Moncke that was sent from Rome that they ought him no subiection Nay what Tribunal abroad did Greg. the Bishop of Rome chalenge when he wrote thus to Eulogius Bishop of Alexandria Vestra beatitudo mihi loquitur diceÌ„s sicut iussistis quod verbuÌ„ iussionis peto à meo auditu remouete quia scio quis sum qui estis Loco enim mihi fratres estis moribus patres NoÌ„ ergo iussi sed quae vtilia visa sunt iudicare curauâ— Your blessednes in your letters saith to me as you coÌ„maÌ„ded which word of coÌ„maÌ„ding I beseech you remoue froÌ„ mine eares because I know who I am what you are In calling you are brethreÌ„ to me in behauior fathers I did not theÌ„ coÌ„mand you but aduertise you what semed best to me The same Greg. teacheth you what it is for any one man to require vniuersall subiection of the whole church as your holie father now doth If Paul saith he would not haue the meÌ„bers of the Lords body to be subiect to any heads but to Christ no not to the Apostles themselues what wilt thou answere to Christ the head of the vniuersall church in the last daie of iudgement which goest about to haue all his members in subiection to thee by the
Canons be not incident to the Princes vocation and therefore no maruell if Princes be raw in those thinges wherewith they be not acquainted And since the danger is great if they command for error their skil not so great but that they may soone misse the truth why should you bee loth that others of deeper iudgement exacter knowledge whom God hath placed to teach both priuate men Princes their duties in those cases should direct moderate the swordes of Princes for feare least they should be missed to the ruine of themselues and many thowsandes with them Theo. We be not loth they should be directed but rather exhort all Princes to take great care and spare no paines to come by faithfull and true direction in those thinges that pertaine to God For if in temporall matters where the losses are but temporal they do nothing without the mature and sound aduise of their graue trustie Counsellours how inexcusable is their negligence if in heauenly things where the bodies soules of them-selues their subiectes may be lost for euer they serue their affectiōs seek not his wil that set them in place gaue them power to maintain his truth safegard his Church Phi. We then agree on both sides that Princes must be directed Theo. We do Phi. If they must be directed ergo by Bishops Theo. Bishops for their calling and learning are the likeliest men to direct them right but yet your ergo doth not hold It is not enough for them to be Bishops they must also be teachers of truth before they may claime to be directours of Princes Phi. Who be more likely to teach truth than Bishops Theo. I said before they were likelie but your conclusion inforceth a necessitie which you can not proue Many Bishops haue taught lies and seduced Princes in the church of God and therefore not their dignitie but their doctrine is it that Princes must regarde for neither Prince nor people stand bound to the persons of men but vnto the truth of God and vnto their teachers so long as they swarue not from truth Phi. And who shall be iudge of truth Theo. Absolute iudge of truth neither Prince nor Priest may chalenge to bee Phi. Why so Theo. God is truth of God I trust no man may be iudge The son of God saith of himself I am truth S. Iohn giueth this record of the spirit of God The spirit is truth Ye can therfore be no iudges of truth vnles ye will be iudges of God Phi. Who shal then be iudge of truth The. Who but Christ Phi. He shal be iudge at the last daie Theo. Hee shall then giue generall and finall iudgement of all men but in the meane time hee onely is the soueraine and supreme iudge of truth The Father hath committed all iudgement to the sonne and my iudgement saith Christ is iust This strife saith Augustine requireth a iudge Iudicet ergo Christus Let Christ be therefore iudge In earth saith Optatus of this matter there can be no iudgement we must seeke for a iudge from heauen But why knocke wee at heauen when as we haue his will here in the Gospell Phi. They mean that Christ speaketh in his church at this day by his word so iudgeth Theo. And we meane that his word is truth and therefore your Bishops can not be iudges of the word of Christ but they must be iudges of Christ himselfe that speaketh by his word which is no small presumption Phi. Shall not the Church be iudge of the Scriptures Theo. My sheepe saith Christ heare my voice they be no iudges of his voice A iudge of the lawe is no obseruer of the law as S. Iames auoucheth and since the whole church is bound to obey the law of God they be no iudges of the law Inferius est nobis quicquid iudicamus It is inferior to vs whatsoeuer we be iudges of Eternam igitur legem mundis animis fas est cognoscere iudicare non fas est The eternall law of God therefore it is lawfull for cleane harts to know it is not lawfull for them to iudge Wee must not saith Augustine to God iudge of so high authoritie neither of the booke which is thine because we submit our vnderstanding to it And againe To the canons of the Scriptures pertaine certaine bookes of the Prophetes and Apostles quos omnino iudicare non audeamus the which in any case wee may not dare to iudge And this is the reason there may be no iudge of truth where no daunger of error is And of the Scriptures S. Austine saith Quod omni errore careant dubitare nefarium est It is a wickednes to make a doubt whether there be any error in them or no therefore there may be no iudges of them but the whole church must be subiect to them and with all humilitie beleeue them Phi. The Bishops be no iudges of the Scriptures whether they bee true or no that as you proue is no doubt and therefore needeth no iudge But in this they be iudges whether the Scriptures be mistaken of others or no. Theo. Then bee they no iudges of truth which is the thing that I first affirmed but of them selues and others which be subiect to errour and ignoraunce Phi. Yet they be iudges of errour though not of trueth Theo. If you take iudging for discerning as the worde doeth often signifie they can not bee teachers of trueth vnlesse they can discerne trueth from errour But onelie God is to limit and appoint by his word what shall stand for truth what for errour With that Bishops haue nothing to do they must heare and beleeue the voice of the great Sheepeheard Christ Iesus as well as the meanest sheepe in his fould Phi. Wee grant you that so you grant vs this that only Bishops bee discerners of truth Theo. A liberall offer You will graunt vs a knowen truth vpon condition that we shall grant you a manifest vntruth Make earth and ashes if you dare to bee iudges of their Lord and maister which is in heauen or deny Bishops when they be at the highest to be the seruants of Christ yea happie be they if they be so much In these things we neither stande at your almes nor aske your consents we be right sure and dare not deny them therefore our assertion is without contradiction yours is vtterly false that only Bishops be discerners of truth For as Bishops ought to discern which is truth before they teach so must the people discern who teacheth right before they beleeue Phi. Shal the people iudge their Pastors you be so new fangled that you say you know not what Theo. We haue the words and warrant of the holy Ghost for that which we say Beleeue not euery Spirit but trie the Spirits whether they be of god for many false prophets are
hereticall Emperour assaied to ouerthrowe multis paucorum fraude deceptis the multitude there being deceiued by the subtiltie of a fewe And therefore hee concludeth Sed nunc ne◠ego Nicenum nec tu debes Ariminense tanquam praeiudicaturus proferre Concilium nec ego huius authoritate nec tu illius detineris But nowe since there be contrarie Councels neither ought I to produce the Councell of Nice nor you the Councel of Ariminum for a preiudice to either part for neither am I bound to the authoritie of this later Councell of Ariminum nor you to the authoritie of that former Nicene Councell Confessing not only that councels might erre but that his aduersarie was not tied to the authoritie of the great Nicene councell comparable to the which no Councell euer was or shall bee in the Church of Christ. Phi. There was great difference betweene the Councell of Ariminum and the Councell of Nice Theo. In the syncere profession of the true fayth there was difference betwixt them but in the manner of calling those Councels and number of the persons present Saint Augustine founde no great aduantage for his side The Arrians had a councell as great and as general for that which they refused as the Catholiques had for that which they professed and therefore this learned father sawe no remedie but hee must yeelde vppe the Nicene Councell as no sufficient conuiction of their heresie Phi. The councell of Ariminum was not generall Theo. The councell was farre greater as it should seeme than the councell of Nice though the Storie of the church doe not lay downe the certaine number of the Bishoppes that mette Phi. What reason leadeth you to thinke it was greater Theo. It is euident by the Storie that the Emperour assembled all the Bishoppes both of the East and of the West church of purpose if it were possible to bring them to some concord and the Bishoppes of either church no doubt farre exceeded the number of three hundred Phi. They were not all at Ariminum Theo. The number was so great and the iourney so long that the Emperour made them sit in two seuerall places the East Bishoppes at Nicomedia the West at Ariminum but that all the Bishoppes of both Churches were gathered in these two places Socrates doeth witnesse Imperator vniuersale Concilium congregare voluit vt cunctos Orientis Episcopos in Occidentem accersitos concordes si posset redderet The Emperour intended to gather an vniuersall Councell that all the Bishoppes of the East comming into the West parts he might get thē to agree if it might be And when the length of the iourney appeared ouer tedious he cōmanded the councel to be diuided willed the west to assemble at Ariminum the East to resort at Nicomedia What a companie there were of the west bishops their own words to Constantius will declare Ariminū ex cunctis Occidentis Ciuitatibus omnes Episcopi conuenimus We assembled at Ariminum euen all the Bishops out of all the west Cities S. Hierom writing of this very Councell saith Illo tempore nihil tam pium nihil tam conueniens seruo Dei videbatur quam vnitatem sequi a totius mundi communione non scindi At that time nothing seemed so religious nothing so conuenient for the seruant of God as to follow vnitie and not to cut himselfe from the Communion of the whole world The communion of the whole world was in the Councell of Ariminum no Councell therefore could be more generall than that was And this no doubt Saint Augustine sawe when hee gaue ouer the Councell of Nice as no greater preiudice to his aduersaries than the Councel of Ariminum was to himselfe and the fayth which he defended Phi. The Councell of Ariminum condemned the error of Arius as their Epistle to Constantius declareth Theo. The Bishoppes assembled at Ariminum were religious and Catholike but not sounding the drift of some craftie heretikes amongest them and ledde with a coulour of concord and peace which the Emperour vrged they relented from the Nicene creede vppon pretence made that the worde 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 was new and offensiue and consented the worde should bee abolished and subscribed to an other Creede that professed the sonne of GOD to bee like to his father according to the Scriptures Phi. Wherein then did that Councell erre Theo. Not in decreeing any falsehood but in exacting lesse to bee beleeued than the Christian faith required and reiecting that worde which the Nicene Councell had established for the righter expressing of the christian faith In this Councell saith Saint Hierom Nomine vnitatis fidei infidelitas scripta est In the name of vnitie and faith infidelity was decreed and written and vppon the conclusion of the Councell Ingemuit totus orbis Arrianum se esse miratus est The whole worlde groned and wondered to see it selfe in Arrianisme Phi. The fathers made more accompt of Councels than you doe Theo. No father euer saide that Councels could not erre Phi. S. Augustine saith their authoritie is most wholesome in the Church Theo. But hee neuer said they were free from all error That is the perfection and reuerence which S. Augustine reserueth to the Scriptures only to be without all suspition of error Solis eis Scripturarum libris qui iam Canonici appellantur didici hunc timorem honoremque deferre vt nullum eorum authorem scribendo aliquid errasse firmissime credam I haue learned to yeeld this feare and honor to the Canonical Scriptures only that I firmely beleeue none of the Authors of them to haue any thing erred in penning them If this honor to be free from error be due to the Canonical Scriptures only then may you not impart it either to succession Councels or Sees Apostolike It must stand for a perpetuall difference betweene the preceptes of God and decrees of men that God is true and all men lyars If ought sayth Austen bee prooued by the manifest authoritie of the diuine Scriptures which in the Church are called Canonicall it must bee beleeued without any doubting Other witnesses or testimonies thou mayst beleeue or not beleeue according as thou shalt see cause to trust thē And distinguishing the Canon of the Scriptures from the writings and resolutions of all that followed were they fathers Councels or whatsoeuer hee sayth In that Canonicall preeminence of the sacred Scriptures if it appeare that but one Prophet Apostle or Euangelist set downe any thing in his writings it is not lawfull to doubt of the trueth of it In the works of those that came after them comprised in bookes that bee infinite in which soeuer of them the same truth is sound yet the authoritie is farre inferior Therfore in thē if happily some things be thought to dissent from truth because they be not vnderstood as they were spoken tamen liberum ibi habet lector
felowes the Louanists in their late Plantine edition haue mended the points made thē interrogatiue for very shame But how so euer you set the points certaine it is the Lorde prayed ioyntly for them all and that at this very supper as the 17. of S. Iohn witnesseth in as ample manner for all as for one I pray for them I pray not for the world Holy father preserue them in thy name whō thou hast giuen me keepe them from euill sanctifie them in thy trueth It is a greater grace to bee kept from euill and to bee sanctified in the trueth which Christ requested for all than to haue their fayth not fayle and to bee conuerted which hee promised vnto Peter You doe therefore very wickedly to teach the people that None other Apostle might chalenge any such speciall prerogatiue either of his office or Person as to bee stedfast in trueth without error The prayer was generall for them all by the iudgement of S. Augustine and were it not the prayer which our Sauiour made for them all and the promise which hee made vnto them all euen the same night that hee spake this are more effectual than this The prayer you haue heard the promise is If I depart not the comforter shall not come vnto you but if I depart I will send him vnto you And when that Spirit of trueth commeth hee shall leade you into all trueth To bee led into all trueth is a better assurance against error than to fall first and after to bee conuerted which is all that is promised vnto Peter in this place Phi. Saint Augustine also Christ praying for Peter prayed for the rest because in the Pastor and Prelate the people is corrected or commended Saint Ambrose writeth that Peter after his tentation was made Pastor of the Church because it was said to him thou being conuerted confirme thy brethren Theo. You might haue spared these authorities but that you must needes haue the Fathers names in your mouthes though they make nothing for you The words of S. Augustine which you cite are not found in the olde Printes nor in their copies but crept into some written bookes by the negligence and vnskilfulnesse of scribes and yet were they S. Augustines I see not what you gaine by them Peter is there called Praepositus that is preferred before the rest as also Praelatus doeth signifie both which wordes in the Fathers bee commonly applied to all Bishops import no singular prerogatiue that Peter should claime but the common charge which all Pastours haue And though the words which you quote be neither many nor materiall yet you mistake them For you say the people is corrected or commended where the Latine is Semper in praeposito populus aut corripitur aut laudatur the people is alwayes reproued or praised in their leader or Prelate S. Ambrose saith no more but that Petrus Ecclesiae praeponitur post quam à Diabolo tentatus est Peter receiueth charge of the church after he was tempted of the Diuell And by these wordes thou being conuerted confirme thy brethrē he saith The Lord doth signifie what it meaneth that he did after chose him to be sheepehearde of the Lordes flocke to wit that hee and all other sheepeheardes by his example should learne to beare with their weake brethren and vse that kindinesse and patience in restoring and confirming others which their Lord and master first shewed in suffering conuerting them And this Sainct Ambrose did well to make the chiefest point of a christian sheepeheard Phi. But S. Ambrose saith in the singular number Petrus ecclesiae praeponitur eum elegit Pastorem Dominici gregis Peter is set ouer the Church and Christ chose him to be Pastor of his flocke Sure you be singular men to quote such places and make such conclusions Peter was set ouer the Church or made Pastour of the Lordes flocke ergo none but Peter Euen so you may reason The Gospell of the glorie of the blessed God is committed to mee saith Paul ergo to none but to Paul And againe I am the teacher of the Gentiles in faith and truth ergo none but he Or when he saith to the Philippians It is giuen vnto you not onely to beleeue in Christ but also to suffer for Christ ergo it is giuen to none but to them If you play thus with Scriptures and fathers you may make mad worke in them both Phi. Peter was made Pastour of the flock Theo. And so were others as you heard out of Ambrose before The Lords flocke not only Peter receiued but we al with him Phi. He was set ouer the church The. And so are al Pastors Our Sauiour saith of teachers in generall Who then is a faithfull seruant wise whom his master hath set ouer his household to giue them meate in season S. Cyprian speaking of himselfe saith Ob hoc ecclesiae praepositum persequitur For this he persueth the ruler or ouerseer of the church S. Augustine saith Praepositi intelligendi sunt per quos ecclesia nunc gubernatur They must be taken for ouerseers of the church by whom the church is nowe gouerned And againe Sunt quidam Ecclesiae praepositi de quibus Paulus dicit sua quaerentes There are some ouerseers of the church of whom Paul saith they seeke their owne So that Praepositus and Pastor Ecclesiae bee not titles proper to Peter but stiles common to all Bishops and therefore by them you can inferre nothing But where all this while are your proofes that Peter could not erre which is the frame that you would fasten on these wordes Why proue you thinges superfluous and skip that which is most in question betwixt vs What father euer saide that these wordes of our Sauiour made Peter free from falling or erring From desperation irrepentance the Lords praier saued him recouered him when he was ready to perish from falling or erring hee was defended no more than the rest nay not so much They fled forsooke their master he presuming farther sped worse as the Lord fortold him the Gospel reporteth of him And were that proued which you neither offer nor are able to proue yet doth it not belong to the Bishop of Rome which is it that we sticke at For touching Peters person and office we can soone be intreated to thinke and speake the best And though we do not say as you do that truth was tied to his sleeue only yet are we of opinion that he and his fellow Disciples were guided into all truth as by whom the church was first to bee planted and from whome the faithfull were to receiue the word of truth the foundation of their faith And therefore we nothing doubt but as the writings of Peter Paul Iames Iohn Iude Matthew bee canonical Scriptures so the preaching not of Peter onely but of all the rest
must haue Theo. The charge which Christ gaue Peter to feede his sheepe is common to all Pastours But with the mercy which Christ shewed him in conuerting him and restoring him after his fall what haue his successors to do Christ promised Peter repentance will you therefore inferre that all Popes haue the like promises Or had they as they haue not doeth this let but they may forsweare their master and loose their faith as Peter did notwithstanding this praier and promise of Christ made vnto him Phi. But they shall also repent as Peter did Theo. If you could proue that promise to pertaine vnto them as you can not yet might their errour be publike and their conuersion secret as Peters was and since they bee subiect to Peters fall namely to denie both their faith and their master though they were promised repentance with him as they bee not yet howe can you knowe what thinges proceeded from the Popes mouth erring and which from the Popes hart repenting Which vnlesse you doe you may erre with him to your eternall confusion and not repent with him for that you haue not the like promise Phi. I will bee with you to the worldes ende saith Christ and hee forsaketh those that erre So that if the church should erre this promise of his were not kept which God forbid Theo. You shew the goodnesse of your cause when you reele thus from the Pope to the church and from the church to the Pope and yet finde nothing to fitte you Christ is with euery one of his and not onely with the Pope as you would haue the place to sound and yet I thinke you will not affirm that no christian can erre Many good men haue erred euen in matters of faith and yet not beene forsaken of Christ. The longer you reason the farther you bee from prouing that the Pope can not erre For this promise concerneth him no more than it doth any other christian and perhaps not so much or if it did yet doth it not free him from errour Phi. The promise which is generall to euery member of the church concerneth him chiefly that is head of the church Theo. Keepe this head of yours till the body need it the church of Christ hath a surer and better head thā the Pope or else it were ill with her Phi. Christ we know is the head of his church and the onely head in such soueraigne and principall manner as no earthly man is or can be yet the Pope may be the ministeriall head Theo. When you proue it then say it in the meane while abuse not the word of God to serue your follies Christ dwelleth in the hartes of all that bee his by faith with them he remaineth vntill the worldes end What is this to the Pope or how doth this fense him from errour Phi. If he be Christs he can not erre Theo. This text doth not proue him to be one of Christs but if he bee then Christ is with him as hee is with all other his members Phi. And they can not erre with whom Christ is Theo. Bee these your demonstrations that the Pope can not erre to shewe for him no better nor other priuilege than that which is common to him with women children if they be mēbers of Christ And were he a mēber of Christ which as yet for ought that I see you can hardly proue hee might be deceiued in some cases of religion as well as Lactantius Irineus Cyprian and others men of great learning and good account in the church of God Phi. Our Sauiour saieth it is not possible that the electe shoulde be seduced Theo. Not possible they should bee seduced to fall from God as the wicked are Yet as they may sinne but not vnto death euen so may they erre but not vnto destruction Their errour shall either be not finall or not mortall Phi. May they that erre bee saued Theo. If they holde fast the foundation which is Christ and erre not of wilfull obstinacie but of humane frailtie why may they not bee saued S. Cyprian said of those that were before him If any of our predecessours either ignorantly or simply did not obserue and keepe that which the Lord by his example and authoritie willed his simplicitie may be pardoned by the goodnesse of God And S. Augustin said of him when an errour of his was alleadged by the Donatistes for their defence Cyprian either was not all of this opinion or he after corrected it by the rule of truth or this blemish in his most beautifull brest he couered with the teates of charity And farther alleadgeth and alloweth this saying of Cyprians Ignosci potest simpliciter erranti he that erreth of simplicity may be pardoned Of himselfe and all others S. Augustine saith Homines sumus vnde aliquid aliter sapere quà m se res habet humana tentatio est In nullo autem aliter sapere quā se res habet Angelica perfectio est We are men and therefore to thinke otherwise than the truth is is humane infirmitie or a tentation common to man To be deceiued in nothing is Angelicall perfection And therefore writing to S. Hierom and of S. Hierom he saith Prorsus non te arbitror sic legi libros tuos velle tanquam Prophetarum aut Apostolorum de quorum scriptis quòd omni errore careant dubitare nefarium Absit hoc à pia humilitate veraci de temetipso cogitatione I am fully of opinion that you would not haue your books to be read in such sort as wee do the Prophetes and Apostles of whose writinges to doubt whether they be free from all errour is wickednesse Be this far from godly humilitie and the true perswasion of your selfe So that set the Apostles aside and their writinges no man ought to thinke of himselfe that hee can not erre neither can you haue that opinion of any man without a proude false perswasion aboue mans state and against Gods truth Phi. What shall wee then saie to the promise which our Lorde made to his When hee the spirite of trueth commeth hee shall teach you all trueth Theo. If it bee referred to the Apostles then present with him as the wordes next before doe specifie I haue yet many things to saie vnto you but you can not beare them nowe wee graunt those witnesses chosen by Christ to teach all Nations were to bee furnished with all trueth and to bee established in the same but if it bee extended to all the faithfull they also shall bee ledde into all trueth needefull and requisite to saluation I meane the substantiall groundes of faith though in some questions of Religion happilie they shall not all bee like minded Phi. And what for the Churche shall shee haue no parte in this promise Theoph. If the faythfull haue the Church which is the number and collection of the faythfull must needes haue But that the
superficial it skilleth not refel it or receiue it Theo. Marke the strength of your argument Needlesse companie with idolatrous wicked persons is prohibited ergo the necessarie subiection to Princes which God commandeth may be refused Phi. We say not needelesse companie but all companie Theo. S. Paul by that worde excludeth not charity much lesse duetie but barreth only that familiaritie which may be relinquished without breach of either Phi. That is your paraphrase not S. Pauls Theo. Weigh the wordes of S. Paul better and your selfe will bee of the same minde with me Thus he saith I wrote vnto you by letters that ye should not keepe companie with fornicatours and I ment not simplie with the fornicatours of this worlde or with the couetous or with extorsioners or with idolatours for then must you goe out of the world But now haue I written to you that you shoulde not bee companions with such If anie man that is called a brother be a Whoore-master or couetous or an idolater or a railer or a drunkard or an extorter eate not with such an one To eate with a man is familiaritie that may be forborne without contempt of Christian Charitie or dutie and that the Apostle willeth them to refraine teaching the Thessalonians to what end and in what sort he would haue it doone If any man obay not our sayings note him by a letter and haue no companie with him that he may be ashamed yet count him not as an enimie but admonish him as a brother When as yet there were no Christian magistates to keepe men by feare from offending S. Paul chargeth the Christians to shew their zeale in shunning the companie of vnruly persons at meate and other familiar meetinges thereby the rather to make them ashamed and to reduce them to Christian and comly behauiour Which precept was general for all disorders We commaund you brethren in the name of our Lord Iesus Christ that you withdraw your selues frō euery brother that walketh inordinately not after the institution which you receiued of vs. Phi. For smaller offences this might be but for heresie S. Paul saith A man that is an hertike after the first and second admonition auoide And so doth S. Iohn If any man come to you and bring not this doctrine receiue him not into your house nor say God saue you vnto him If we may not so much as salute them doe you thinke we may serue them or obey them Theo Were you in debt to an heretike would you not pay him his own because you must not salute him Phi. Debt is dew whether he be Turke Infidel or heretike therefore reason he haue his owne but I must not do that which I neede not Theo. And whether thinke you the truer debt that which groweth by our act and consent or that which is imposed vppon vs by the will and commaundement of God As when S. Paul saith Owe nothing to any man but giue to all men their due Do you not think this as good debt as if it were in coyne Phi. If it be their due Theo. We owe it not if it be not due but if it be must we not render that which is due to all men be they Turks infidels and heretikes Phi. To heretiks nothing is due Theo. Doth not the seruant owe faithful diligence to his master notwithstanding his master be an infidel or an heretik Phi. If the master become an heretik the seruant is ipso facto made free Theo. By whose law Gods or mans Phi. By the ciuill lawes of auncient Emperours Theo. But before those lawes were made by Princes might seruants by Gods law refuse their masters for idolatry or heresie Phi. For idolatrie he might not whatsoeuer for heresie The. If God wil haue christiā seruāts obediēt subiect to their masters in al things to please thē though they be infidels enimies to the faith why not likewise to them that are deceiued in some points of faith The like we aske of man and wife Might the husband forsake his wife or the woman her husband for these causes Phi. For infidelitie they might Theo. And what for heresie Ph. The case is not ruled Theo. Yeas that it is Our Sauiour forbiddeth all men to put awaie their wiues except it bee for adulterie Now adulterie is not heresie And this was Pope Caelestinus his errour which Innocentius the 3. cōdemneth Therfore the case is ruled both by Gods Law and by your own Decretals Phi. They may not bee diuorced Theo. Then must she continue still his wife and is by Gods lawe bounde to bee subiect vnto him and to loue him though he be an heretike or an infidel And so are the children bound to cherish honor and obey their Parentes by the Lawe of God notwithstanding they be Ethnikes or aliens from the faith And therefore these prohibitions Eate not with them keepe them not companie salute them not discharge not seruants children nor wiues for yeelding that duetie to their masters parentes and husbandes which God hath commaunded but cut off onely that familiar and friendly greeting saluting conuersing which amongest brethren is requisite but to wicked and vngodly persons may without sinne be denied Phi. What then is your answere Theo. S. Paul forbiddeth voluntarie companie not necessarie duetie S. Iohn those familar and friendly salutations which argue good liking and fauour to the parties and may bee forborne not that publike subiection to Magistrats which God hath inioyned vs whether we will or no. Phi. Ought we to flatter Princes if they be heretik◠Theo. We may flatter no man in that which is euill yet must we giue euill mē that which God hath allowed them The places which you bring barre no kinde of duetie prescribed by the law of God neither of seruauntes to their masters nor of children to their parentes nor of wiues to their husbandes though their masters parentes and husbands be heretikes much lesse doe they prohibite submission to Princes which God exacteth before these domestical duties and commaundeth all men Apostles and Bishops not excepted to giue feare honour subiection and tribute to Princes as their due when Princes as yet were pernicious idolaters and barbarous persecutors of the faith faithfull And who that hath any regard of trueth will preferre your crooked shapelesse consequēts before the manifest doctrine of Christ and his Apostles Giue to Caesar the things that be Caesars You must bee subiect whosoeuer resisteth power resisteth the ordinance of God Honour the king and submit your selues whether it be to the king as the chiefe excelling or vnto the Gouernors as sent by him For so is the wil of God These be flat plaine precepts which you can not ouerthrow but with an euident direct and speciall release The directions which the Apostles gaue to shame the disordered
you Marke howe Paul deliuered the man of Corinth to Satan Eijciebatur nempe a communi fidelium caetu hee was cast out of the congregation of the faythfull hee was cutte off from the flocke of Christ and left naked and being so destitute of Gods helpe hee lay open to the Wolfe and subiect to euerie assault So sayth Theodorete By this place where Paul deliuered the incestuous Corinthian to Satan we are taught that the diuell inuadeth them which are seuered cut off from the bodie of the church finding them destitute of Gods grace Keepe your selues therefore within your limites Pastors haue their charge which is as S. Paul noteth to watch ouer soules they haue not to doe with the goods or bodies of the faithfull Their goods are Caesars by the plaine resolution of our Sauiour Giue vnto Caesar the thinges which are Caesars Which God willed Samuel to aduertise the people of when they first demaunded a king Shew them the right or law of the king that shall raigne ouer them And so Samuel did saying This shall be the law of your king He shall take your sonnes and appoint them for his charets and to be his horsemen shal make theÌ„ captaines ouer thowsandes captaines ouer fiftyes set them to eare his grounds to reape his haruest to make his instruments of war things to serue for his charets And he wil take your fields vines best olyues giue them to his seruants And he wil take the tenth of your corn wine giue it to his Princes seruitors And he wil take your men seruaÌ„ts maideseruants the choice of your yong meÌ„ your asses vse theÌ„ to his work The tenth of your sheep wil he take ye shal be his seruaÌ„ts Phi. Make you the king Lord of al without exception Theo. Though God neuer ment that Princes inordinate priuate pleasures should wast consume the wealth of their Realmes yet may they iustly commaunde the goods and bodies of all their Subiects in time both of warre and peace for any publike necessitie or vtilitie Whereby God declareth Princes and not Pastours to bee the right ouerseers of temporall and earthlie matters and consequentlie that the power of the keyes extendeth not to those thinges which are committed to the Princes charge I meane neither to the goods nor to the bodies of christian men To a king sayth Chrysostom are the bodies of men committed to the Priest their soules The king pardoneth corporall offences the Priest remitteth the guiltinesse of sinne The king compelleth the Priest exhorteth the one with force the other with aduise the kings weapons are sensible the Priâ—stes are Ghostly The like distinction betweene them doth S. Hierom make Rex nolentibus praest Episcopus volentibus ille timore subijcit hic seruituti donatur ille corpora custodit ad mortem hic animas seruat ad vitam The king ruleth men vnwilling the Priest none saue the willing the king hath his in subiection with terrour the Priest is appointed for the seruice of his the king mastereth their bodies with death but the Priest preserueth their soules to life This power of the sword our Sauiour precisely prohibited his Apostles as I haue shewed and therefore you may not indirectly nor by accident chalenge it Phi. Why then did Paul saie Knowe you not that wee shall iudge the Angels howe much more secular matters Theo. If this bee the best hold you haue in the new Testament for secular matters you must take the paynes to light from your horse and goe on your feete as well as your neighbours For the Apostle speaketh that of all Christians which you restraine to Priests and moueth the parties striuing rather to make their brethren arbiters of their quarrelles than to persue one an other before Infidels What grant is this to you in your owne right to bee iudges ouer your brethren in all secular affaires and not onely without their consents to determine their griefes but also to bereaue them of their goods and lands and afflict their bodies yea to pull the sword out of Princes handes take their Crownes from their heades when the rulers are beleeuers as well as the Preachers Do you not know saith S. Paul that the Saincts not onely Priests shal iudge the world If the world then shal be iudged by you speaking to all that were of the church at Corinth are ye vnworthy to iudge the smalest matters He saith not it was their right to iudge secular matters but they were worthy to bee trusted with them whom God would trust with greater and shewing that hee spake this of the people not of the Priests he saith If then you haue any iudgementes concerning the thinges of this life make euen the contemptible in the church your iudges Hee saith not God hath made them your iudges but rather thaÌ„ your contending brabling about earthly things which you professe to contemn should be knowen to Ethniks such as hate deride both Christ you your selues make the meanest of your brethren whom you will your iudges Nowe ioyne your conclusion ergo the Pope hath authority to dispose the goods lands and liues of all the faithâ—ul euen of Princes theÌ„selues be they neuer so iust or religious Magistrates and see what a non sequitur you conclude out of S. Pauls wordes Phi. The Primatiue church vnderstood this place of Priests and Bishops as appeareth by Sainct Augustine complaining of the tumultuous perplexities of other mens causes in secular matters to the which troubles sayth he the Apostle hath fastened vs. 1. Corinth 5. The like hee witnesseth of S. Ambrose at Millan And S. Gregory reporteth the same of himselfe at Rome Theo. Trueth it is the Bishoppes of the Primatiue church were greatly troubled with those matters not as ordinarie iudges of those causes but as arbiters elected by the consent of both parties And I coulde requite you with Gregories owne wordes of the same matter in the same place Quod certum est nos non debere which it is certaine we ought not to do but yet I thinke so long as it did not hinder their vocation function though it were troublesome vnto them they might neither in charitie nor in dutie refuse it because it tended to the preseruing of peace loue amongest meÌ„ And the Apostle had licenced all men to choose whom they woulde in the church for their iudges no doubt meaning that they which were chosen shoulde take the paynes to heare the cause and make an ende of the strife But it is one thing to make peace between brethren as they did by heaping their griefes with consent of both sides and an other thing to claime a iudiciall interest in those causes in spite of mens heartes Which wrong you shoulde not offer the least of your brethren much lesse may you
not I trust to seek of that which euery child with vs cā say Thou shalt make thee no grauen image nor the likenes of any thing that is in heauen aboue or the earth beneath or in the waters vnder the earth Thou shalt not bow down to them nor worship them Phi. Doth this precept touch the image of Christ Theo. It toucheth any thing made with handes that is worshipped be it the image of God of Christ or of whō you wil. Phi. No Sir it toucheth the images of false Gods but not of the true God for they be Idols that are nothing Theo. Wee speake not of the thinges them-selues but of their images made with handes A false God is an idole in the heart of man and so are all thinges in heauen and earth to the which wee giue any such ghostlie or bodilie honour as God hath prohibited Sainct Paul calleth the couetous man a worshipper of idols of others hee saieth whose God is their bellie teaching vs that whatsoeuer we loue serue or obey against the commaundement of God we make it our God by preferring it before the wil and precepts of the true God in that it is our god which of it selfe is not God it is an idoll the loue seruice and honour that is so yeelded to it is idolatrie by the lawe of god For this cause the bowing our knees and holding vp our hands to an image though it bee not all the honour we ow and yeeld to god yet is it such honor as he hath prohibited to be giuen to any thing made with handes and in that respect our aduised and determined doing it against his commaundement is idolatrie For his precept is resolute Thou shalt not make thee the likenes of any thing in heauen or earth thou shalt not bow thy selfe before them nor serue them Phi. This may not bee vnderstood of the image of the true God For if the images of Princes may be reuerenced idolatry not committed much more the image of God Theo. Earthly similitudes of your making may not controule the heauenly precepts of Gods owne giuing The images of Princes may not wel be despited or abused least it be taken as a signe of a malicious hart against the Prince but bowing the knee or lifting vp the hand to the image of a Prince is flat ineuitable idolatrie Phi. The image of God deserueth more honor thā the images of mē in respect of the person that is resembled The. You heard the plaine precept of God commaunding no such honor to bee giuen to any image made with handes no not to the image of himselfe Phi. I heare you so interprete but I heare not him so command Theo. You may when you wil the scripture in that point is very cleare Moses the reporter of the law from Gods owne mouth laying foorth the ground of the second precept saith The Lord spake vnto thee out of the midst of the fire and yee heard the voice of the words but sawe no similitude Take therefore good heede to your selues for you saw no image of God in the day that the Lord spake vnto you in Horeb out of the midst of the fire that ye corrupt not your selues and make you a grauen image of God or likenes of any figure whether it be of male or female or of any beast that is on earth And so along pursuing the seuerall branches of the second commandement They saw no shape of God least they should make them any image of God contrary to that which hee had commaunded them By this precept Esaie proueth that God should not be figured To whome then will you liken God or what similitude will you set vp vnto him And sharply rebuking the people for not remembring that part of the law wherein they were charged to make no likenesse nor similitude vnto God he saith Know ye nothing Haue ye not heard it hath it not beene told you from the beginning Not meaning any secret or priuate instruction of man but the open written law of God which was then deliuered them when they first became the people of God So that aswell the writer as the interpreter of the law yeeld this to be the sense of the second precept that no similitude or likenes should be made vnto God because no such image cā resemble the brightnes of his glory but only demonstrate the basenesse of our fansie Phi. We talke not of making similitudes vnto God that be vnlike him but of worshipping those that be like him Theo. And since none can be made that is like him the bowing to any is not the honoring of him but the seruing of idols which he ahhorreth Againe the first part of this precept Thou shalt not make thee any grauen image nor the likenes of any thing directly concerning the shapes and images that any man would or could make vnto God as Moses and Esaie doe witnesse the rest of the same precept Thou shalt not bowe downe to them nor serue them must needes be referred to the selfesame similitudes and figures which before were prohibited to be made Thirdly if any grauen Image of God might be worshipped why might it not be made since it cannot be worshiped vntill it be made God therefore prohibiting it to be made instructeth vs that though it were made it should not be worshiped And to that end God himselfe protesteth My glorie will I not giue to an other nor my praise to grauen Images meaning no part of the honor and seruice that is due vnto him whether it bee spirituall as feare loue faith obedience praiers and thankes or corporall as bowing the knee lifting vp the hand burning incense and such like which are Idolatries when they are done to Images as wel as the former kindes of inward and Ghostly worship Phi. Idolatries they be when they be doone to the Images of false Gods which are Idols not otherwise Theo. False Gods by nature there are none We know saith the Apostle that an Idol is nothing in the world and that there is none other God but one and he is wholy trueth But the shape or figure made with hands to resemble the true God whatsoeuer it be is an Idoll prohibited by Gods Law as I haue proued and therefore bowing the knee or holding vp the hand to it is Idolatry condemned by that precept which I last repeated Thou shalt not bow thy selfe to them nor serue them Phi. What not to the Image of the true God Theo. The Image of the true God made with hands is a false God and no likenesse of his but a lewd imagination of yours set vp to feede your eyes with the contempt of his sacred wil dishonour of his holy name and open iniurie to his diuine nature For what resemblance hath a dead and dombe stocke shapened like a man to the glorious inuisible and infinite Maiestie of the liuing
speed For the traditions which they mention bee either points of faith or not If they be then by the general confession of all antiquity they must be warraÌ„ted by the scriptures or els we must reiect theÌ„ If they be no parts nor consequents of the christian faith then do not those fathers weaken our assertion wheÌ„ we say that all points of faith must be proued by the scriptures this we gaine besides that the traditioÌ„s which you make the grouÌ„dwork of al your religion as they be not written so be they not necessary to saluation Phi. The faith it selfe is proued by tradition Theo. That doctrine which the Apostles deliuered by word of mouth the very same they put afterward in writing that it might be the touchstone triall of truth in times to come but this is nothing to such vnwritten verities as be different from the scriptures Teach what you wil by tradition so it accord with the written word of God we bée not against it but you may not build any point of faith vpon tradition except the scriptures confirme the same Phi. This is an error of yours which you seeke to bolster against the church The. You giue vs words we giue you proofs this which you cal an error of ours was taught receiued in the primatiue church for a catholik truth except you caÌ„ shew some points of faith which the father 's beleeued vpoÌ„ traditioÌ„ wtout scriptures the world wil suspect that you make traditioÌ„s but a cloake for your heresies Phi. S Augustin often writeth that many of the articles of our religion points of highest importance are not so much to be proued by scriptures as by traditioÌ„ The. You bely so many that it is no newes for you to bely S. Austen Where saith he so Phi. Namely auouching that in no wise we could beleeue that children in their infancy should be baptised if it were not an Apostolik tradition De gen ad lit lib. 10 cap. 23. Theo. But where doth S. Austen write this often that of many articles of religion points of highest importance Of so many high points you should haue shewed two at least Phi. Tradition caused him to beleeue that the baptized of heretiks should not be rebaptized notwithstanding S. Cryprians autority the manifold scriptures aleaged by him though they seemed neuer so pregnaÌ„t de bap lib. 2. cap. 7. Theo. Your heades bee so ful of traditions that you can not report a father without corruptions It is not true that Tradition nothing else caused him to beleeue this against CypriaÌ„s authority he was armed with scriptures reasons inuincible as himselfe both sheweth and saieth Prouoking a Donatist to conferre with him about this errour Ratione agamus diâ—inarum scripturarum authoritatibus agamus Let vs discusse this matter saith he by argumeÌ„t by the authorities of the diuine scriptures And repeating a reason that was expressed in the Princes edict forbidding rebaptizatioÌ„ he maketh the rebaptizers this offer Faciant mille Concilia Episcopi vestri huic vni sententiae respondeant ad quod volueritis consentimus vobis Let your Bishops assemble a thowsand councels answere but this one sentence we yeeld to you at your pleasures And therefore he doubted not to say of Cyprian though otherwise he did honour him very much Aliter sapiâ—t quam veritas diligentius considerata patefecit He was of an other opinion than that which the truth vpon more diligent consideration reueiled And when CypriaÌ„s epistle in this case was obiected he replied Cyprians epistles I esteeme not as canonicall but I coÌ„sider them by the canonical scriptures that which in them agreeth with the authority of the diuine scriptures I receiue with his praise that which doth not agree by his leaue I refuse The general custom of the câ—uâ—ch reuoked him from following Cypriâ—â—s authority though it were great and brought him to the deeper debating of the question but he which sayth that S. Augustine in all his conferences and writinges aleadgeth nothing against rebaptization but tradition may be rebaptized if his christianity be no more than his cunning Phi. For baptizing of infants his words be plaine It were not at al to be beleeued if it were not an Apostolike tradition Theo. I see the words wel enough but the meaning of the speaker in this place and the likenesse of the same speach in other places make me to thinke that a letter too much is crept into these wordes as through the iniuries of times and varietie of scribes many thowsand deprauations and diuerse lections were and are yet in the workes of S. Augustine and other fathers not onely by the iudgement of the learned but by the very sight of their margins Phi. A letter to much which is it Theo. You read Nec omnino credenda nisi Apostolica esset traditio I thinke it shoulde bee Nec omnino credenda nisi Apostolica esse traditio Esset for esse is a scope in writing soone committed but a matter of some moment in altering the sense Phi. And therefore you may not correct it without apparent proofe Theo. I may suspect it though I take not vpoÌ„ me to correct it but leaue it to the indifferent reader Phi. You must be led thereunto with very good reason Theo. First the very course of the sentence leadeth mee so to thinke Sainct Augustine in these three distunctiues Nequaquam spernenda neque vllo modo superflua deputanda nec omnino credenda The custome of our mother the Church in baptizing her infantes is neither to be despised nor anie waie to bee counted superfluous nor at all to bee beleeued did not meane to contradict him-selâ—e but by steppes to increase the credit of this custome and the third part Nec omnino credenda Not at all to be beleeued doeth rather euert all that went before than giue you any farther commendation to that Tradition For Not at all to be beleeued is as much as to be despised and counted superfluous which is repugnant to the wordes precedent But reading Esse â—or Esset the partes are consequent ech after other in better order and the last is the same that Sainct Augustine in other places doth often vtter in the very like manner and kinde of speech that here is vsed The custome of our mother the church in baptizing her infants is neither to bee despised nor by any meanes to bee accompted superfluous nec omnino credenda nisi Apostolica esse traditio nor at all to bee thought to be any other than an Apostolike tradition So speaking elsewhere of the very same matter he sayth Non nisi authoritate Apostolica traditum rectissimè creditur It is most rightly beleeued to bee none other than a tradition of the Apostles Where wee finde not onely the same purpose but the verie same phrase and force of speech that were vsed before
it or recall you backe from your enterprise is sacrilege Woe bee to you that call good euill and euill good which set darkenesse for light and light for darkenesse and put bitter for sweete and sweete for bitter Woe bee to you that are so wise in your owne eyes and so prudent in your owne conceites that you preferre your owne Counsell before the wisedome of God Philand Nay you preferre your wittes before the whole Church of GOD you woulde not other-wise take vppon you to controle your forefathers and teachers in such sort as you doe Theoph. If they forsooke their fathers yea GOD him-selfe why shoulde wee not renounce them rather as parricides than resemblance of their auncestours Philand They were Catholikes and so are wee Theoph. You leaue the steppes both of Christ and his Church and yet you must and will bee catholikes Philand Wee followe them better than you doe Theoph. So it appeareth by your halfe communion which they condemned for sacrilege and you embrace for Religion Phi. Here is such a stirre about eating and drinking as though all consisted therein and in the meane while you neglect and abolish the holy and vnbloody sacrifice which is farre more Catholike than your communion Theo. You neede not make so light of eating and drinking at the Lordes table There depende greater promises and dueties on that than on your vnbloody sacrificing the sonne of God As often as yee shall eate this breade and drinke this cup yee shewe the Lordes death till hee come Without eating and drinking therefore the Lordes death is not shewed The bread which we breake to be eaten is it not the communion of Christes body The cup of blessing which wee blesse that all may drinke of it is it not the communion of Christes blood If wee refuse eating the one or drinking the other can we be partakers of Christ or his spirit Hee that eateth my flesh sayth our sauiour and drinketh my blood dwelleth in mee and I in him and except you eate the flesh of the sonne of man and drinke his blood yee haue no life in you These bee the fruites and effectes of religions and worthie eating and drinking at the Lordes table shewe vs the like for your sacrificing and wee will thinke you had some occasion though no reason to turne the Lords Supper into an offering Philand This one Sacrifice hath succeeded all other and fulfilled all other differences of Sacrifices and hath the force and vertue of all other to be offered for all persons and causes that the others for the lyuing and the dead for sinnes and for thankesgiuing and for what other necessitie soeuer of body or soule Bee not these as great and good effectes of our Sacrifice as those which you nowe rehearsed for eating and drinking at the Altar Theo. They bee great if you had as good authoritie for the one as wee haue for the other Philand Wee haue better Theo. Wee must giue you leaue to say so but you shall giue vs leaue not to beleeue you Phi. All the fathers with one consent stand on our side for the Sacrifice Theoph. Were it so that yet is many degrees beneath the credite of our conclusion You bring vs the speaches of men wee bring you the woorde of God I trust you will aguise some difference betwixt them Phi. As though wee coulde not bring you Scriptures as well as fathers for the sacrifice of the Masse Melchisedec by his oblation in bread and wyne did properly and most singularly prefigurate this office of Christes eternall Priesthoode and sacrificing himselfe vnder the formes of breadâ— and wyne which shall contynue in the Church throughout all Christian Nations in steede of all the offeringes of Aarons Priesthood as the Prophet Malachie did foretell as Saint Cyprian Saint Iustine Saint Irineus and others the most auncient Doctors and Martyrs doe testifie Cyprian epistola 63. num 2. Iustin. dial cum Trypho post med Iren. libro 4. capit 32. And Saint Augustine libro 17. cap. 20. de ciuitat Dei libro primo contra aduers. leg prophet ca. 18. lib. 3. de baptism ca. 19. S. Leo sermone 8. de passione auouch that this one sacrifice hath succeeded all other and fulfilled all other differences of Sacrifices c. Yea in S. Pauls epistle to the Church at Corinth the first and tenth chapter We maie obserue that our bread and chalice our table and altar the participation of our host and oblation be compared or resembled point by point in all effectes conditions and properties to the altars hostes sacrifices and immolatious of the Iewes and Gentiles Which the Apostle woulde not or coulde not haue done in this Sacrament of the altar rather than in other Sacraments or seruice of our Religion if it onelie had not beene a Sacrifice and the proper worship of God among the Christians as the other were among the Iewes and heathen And so doe all the fathers acknowledge calling it onelie and continuallie almost by such termes as they doe no other Sacrament or ceremonie of Christes Religion The Lamb of God laide vpon the table Concil Nicen. The vnbloodie seruice of the Sacrifice In Concil Ephesin epist. ad Nestor pag. 605. The sacrifice of sacrifices Dionys. Eccles. Hieronym cap. 3. The quickning holie sacrifice the vnbloodie host and victime Cyril Alex. in Concil Ephes. Anatâ— the propitiatorie sacrifice both for the liuing and the dead Tertul. de cor Milit. Chrys. ho. 41. in 1. Corinth ho. 3. ad Phil. Ho. 66. ad pop Antioch Cypr. epi. 66. decaena Do. nu 1. August Euch. 109. Quaest. 2. ad Dulcit to 4. Ser. 34. de verb. Apost The sacrifice of our mediator the sacrifice of our price the sacrifice of the newe Testament the sacrifice of the Church August li. 9. ca. 13. li. 3. de baptist ca. 19. The one only inconsumptible victime without which there is no Religion Cyprian de caen Do. nu 2. Chrysost. ho. 17. ad Hebr. The pure oblation the newe ofspring of the newe Law the vital and impolluted host the honoâ—râ—ble dreadful Sacrifice the Sacrifice of thankesgiuing or Eucharistical the Sacrifice of Melchisedec This is the Apostles and fathers doctrine God grant you may find mercy to see so euident and inuincible a trueth Theo. You be nowe where you would be and where the fathers seeme to fit your foote But if your sacrifice bee conuinced to bee nothing lesse than catholike or consequent to the Prophets Apostles or Fathers Doctrine what say you then to your vanitie in alleaging if not impietie in abusing so many Fathers and Scriptures to proppe vp your follies Phi. Bee not these places which we bring you for this matter vndeniable vnauoydable indefeatable vnanswerable Theo. In any case lay on loade of termes You haue made vs so many in your late Rhemish testameÌ„t that now you must not seeme to lack But what if all these places neede
Christ then you giue them diuine honor as if they were Christ but if they be creatures still howe doth your false imagination excuse you from idolatrie Phi. Wee be sure they be not For Christ saide of them This is my bodie and this is my blood and therefore honoring that which the Priest holdeth in his hands and lifteth vp after consecration we be sure we honor Christ and not the creatures of bread and winâ— Theo. So S. Paul said The rocke was Christ and yet to worship that visible rocke with diuine honor had beene idolatrie Phi. The speeches be nothing like Theo. Then tell vs the difference Phi. Christ spake the one actiuely and presently the other was but a collectioÌ„ of things past long before made by S. Paul And again the one is in the new Testament the other in the old Theo. You might haue added that the one was stone the other bread the one in the desert the other in the city Philand Keepe your trifling distinctions for your selues Theo. They wil no way but be ioyned cheek by cheek with yours Christ you say spake the one who spake the other in Paul but Christ Paul said of himselfe that Christ spake in him and Christ saieth of his Apostles It is not you that speak but the spirit of your father that speaketh in you And therefore you must receiue that which Paul spâ—ke not as the word of men but as it is in deed the word of god that cannot went trueth because the word of God is truth Phi. We do not deny but he spake truth Theo. Then haue we plainer proofe that the stony rock in the desert waâ— Christ than you haue that the bread on the Lords table is Christ. For Christ doth not say in precise terms that the bread was his body but only this is my body And as for the diuersitie of the two testaments that maketh nothing to this issue For if the rocke of the old test were Christ the bread of the new Test. can be no more and therfore diuine adoration was as due to the rocke then as it is to the bread now Phi. By no meanes For the rocke was not transubstantiated into Christ as the bread is The. If Pauls words be true without chaÌ„ging the rock into Christ why may not the words of Christ be likewise true without turning the substaÌ„ce of bread into the substance of his body Phi. We tell you the reason The one is substantially conuerted into Christs flesh and so was not the other Theo. This is your fansie to dreame of a difference where none is the affrmations be like why should not the adorations bee like And if you could not worship the rock without coÌ„mitting idolatrie though the rock were Christ how can you giue diuine honor to the bread and wine since they bee Christ euen after the same sort that the rock was Or if that comparison do not please you why do you worship the pixe wherein the bread is so the chalice wherein the wine is not the priest that by your doctrine doth create eate Christ Phi. We worship neither the pixe nor the chalice but Christ that is contained in them both Theo. And is not the same Christ that was contained in them both inclosed in the priests body when he eateth and drinketh your sacrifice Phi. Yeas Theo. And as really contained in his body as in your golden boxe or gilden chalice Phi. But yet we adore not the flesh of christ after it is once entered the mouth of man Theo. You do not I know but why should you not Why suffer you Christ in any place to be without the honor that is due vnto him Wil you serue him where please you ourskip him at your discretions Phi. Should we adore him when we know not where he is The. You be as sure he is in the Priest as in the pixe for you see him in neither Why then do you adore him in the one and not in the other Phi. I think you would not haue vs adore our sauiour The. I would not haue you adore him wheÌ„ where you only list much lesse to adore a peece of bread in his steed be first sure you haue him then adore him wheresoeuer you find him Phi. So we do Th. You do not You adore him not in the priest Phi. We see him not The. Wil you not adore him till you see him How then do you see him in the chalice or in the pixe Phi. There we be certaine he is Theo. You be as certaine of the other Phi. The fathers wil vs to adore the flesh of Christ in the mysteries but not in other meÌ„s bodies The. Do they wil you to adore the mysteries themselues I mean the mystical sacramental signes Phi. Not the signes theÌ„selues they bee but accidents not to be adored but the sacrament it self they teach vs to adore The. With diuine honor Phi. With what els The. Adoration if it be attributed in any father to the mystical signes is that kind of reuerence which we yeeld to things that be sanctified for Gods vse not godly honor Phi. I smel a rat The. You were best then looke to your host for that of all others that is a most dangerous beast to your deuotion Phi. Why The. I wil tel you that anon in the mean time what was it that troubled your wits Phi. With a sly distinction of twofold adoration you think to slip the fathers which we will bring against you for the worshipping of the blessed sacrament The. Is that al your feare Phi. That is a way to wrangle to make the people beleeue our doctrine touching adoratioÌ„ of the sacrament is not catholik The. Set aside one father whom your selues shall not deny but that he speaketh of the substaÌ„ce of bread wine in the rest which you bring we wil vse no such aduaÌ„tage Phi. What wil you not do The. We wil not choke you with that second acception of adoration shew that the fathers adored the sacrament or taught the people to so doe wee require no more Phi. That I will presently S. Austen saith ep 118. c. 3. that it is he that the Apostle saith shal be damned that doth not by singular veneration or adoration make a difference between this meat al others And again in Psa. 91. No man eateth it before he adore it And S. Ambro. li. 3 c. 12. de spi. sanct We adore the flesh of Christ in the mysteries S. Chrysost. hom 24. in 1. Cor. We adore him on the altar as the Sages did in the manger S. Nazianzene in Epitap Gorgon My sister called vpon him which is worshipped vpon the altar Theodoret Dial. 2. In coÌ„fes The mystical tokeÌ„s be adored S. Denys this Apostles scholer made solemne inuocation of the sacrament after consecration Eccl. Hierar ca. 3. part 3. in princip before the
by their own words to teach more than idle signes or ONLY figures in the Lords supper because together with the name goe the vertâ—es and effects of Christes flesh bloud vnited in manner of a Sacrament to the visible signes And this their assertion neither troubleth our Doctrine nor strengthneth your error Againe these writers may very well say the Sacraments of the Gospell BE NO FIGVRES but TRVETH IT SELFE in that respect as figures bee taken for samplers of things to come Such were the figures of the law which did premonstrat the coÌ„ming of christ in flesh ceased at his coÌ„ming And so the mysteries of the Lords table were not figures of things expected but euidences of the truth there sitting in persoÌ„ the next day to be nailed to the crosse therby to fulfil abolish al figures our sacrameÌ„ts are now not signes of farther promises but memorials of his mercies alredy performed Do this saith christ not in figure of an other truth to come but in remeÌ„brance of me which am come for memorie you know stretcheth only to things past and doone and in this sense the letter may bee safely pressed and your carnall conueyance nothing relieued I find a third cause that might induce them to force the letter in this sort yet no way confirming your grosse supposall which is this When the Greeke church fell at variance for Images they which held that Christ ought not to be figured after the likenes of our bodies amongest other reasons alleadged this for one that the Lord at his Supper for a true and effectuall Image of his incarnation chose the whole substance of bread not any way like the proportion of a man lest it should occasion Idolatry The defenders of Images whose side Damascene tooke pressed with this obiection durst not flee to your annihilation of the substance of bread and adoration of the Sacrament with diuine honour which no doubt they would haue doone with great triumph had those two points of your Doctrine beene then counted catholike but yeelding and by their silence confessing that the substance of bread remayned in the supper and was not adored for so the contrarie part opposed at length for very pure neede came to this shift that the mysticall bread was not ordained to resemble and figure Christs humane nature nor so called by christ at his maundie who said not this is a figure of my body but my body nor a figure of my bloud but my bloud and when Basil and Eustathius were produced affirming the bread and wine to be figures and resemblances of Christs flesh and bloud the Patrones of Images replied that was spoken alwaies before neuer after consecration Wherefore Damascene first beganne this myncing and straining the wordes of Christ not to build on them any reall or corporall conuersion of the bread into the flesh of christ but in fauour of his artifical pictures and Images he could by no meanes abide that the mysteries should after consecration be called Images and figures of Christs bodie The next that traced this path after Damascene was Epiphanius not that auncient and learned Bishoppe of Cyprus but a pratling Deacon in the bastard Councell of Nice whose furious and fanaticall answer to the Councel of Constantinople that made this obiection declareth more tongue than witte more face than learning Christ did not say take ye eat ye the Image of my bodie Reade whiles thou wilt saith hee thou shalt neuer find that either the Lord or his Apostles or the Fathers called that vnbloudie Sacrifice which the Priest offereth AN IMAGE Thus doth he braie foorth defiance to the whole worlde without trueth without shame For Chrysostome saith If Iesus were not once dead whose image and signe is this Sacrifice This Sacrifice is an image and samplar of that Sacrifice And Gelasius Surely the IMAGE and resemblance of the bodie and bloud of Christ is celebrated in the action of the mysteries We must therefore so thinke of the Lord Christ himselfe as we professe and obserue in his IMAGE And likewise Theodoret. Ortho. The mysticall signes which are offered to god by his Priests whereof doest thou call them signes Eranist Of the body blood of the Lord. Ortho It is very well saide Conferre then the image with the paterne and thou shalt see the likenes Dionysius calleth it both an image and a figuratiue sacrifice Nazianzene excusing himselfe How should I saith he presume to offer vnto God that externall sacrifice the image of the great mysteries Clemens Offer you in your churches the image of the royall body of Christ. Macarius In the Church are offered breade and wine the images of his flesh and blood The 〈◊〉 â—aâ—hers keepe the same word the same sense Ambrose In the law was a shadow in the Gospel is an image in heauen is the trueth Before was offered a lambe or a calf now Christ is offred here in an image there in truth where he intreateth his father as an aduocate for vs. AusteÌ„ Christ gaue an image of his burnt offering to be celebrated in the church for a remembrance of his passion The rest say the like but what neede we farther refutation of so ridiculous and vnshamefast a bragge such causes such councels such poppets such Proctors The very children in the church of God knowe that the diuine mysteries by the generall definition of a Sacrament be visible signes of inuisible graces and as Augustine interpreteth the word Sacramentum id est sacrum signum a Sacrament that is a sacred signe So that vnlesse they be signes they can possibly be no sacraments neither sacraments nor signes can they be without or before coÌ„secration which this stout champion had not yet learned therfore his verdict in matters of religion except his cunning were greater may be wel refused As Damasene and your prating Epiphanius were more than 700. yeares after Christ so Theophilact and Euthymius are farre younger The first of them was Bishoppe of the Bulgarians who were conuerted to the faâ—eth 868. yeares after Christ the second your owne chronologie placeth after Gracian and Lombard 1100. yeares short of Christ. Were then these later Grecians wholy with you what gaine you by them If you woulde oppose them to Tertullian Origen Cyprian Austen Gelasius Thedorete others of purer times and sounder iudgements you could winne nothing by that bargaine the choice were soone made which to take which to leaue but in deede you do them wrong to returne them for transsubstantiators they neuer knew what it ment They say the mysteries of the Lords table be not only figures but haue the truth annexed No figures of grace differed but seales of mercy perfourmed in Christ and inioyed of vs no called figures or images of Christes flesh after consecration but bearing as well the names as the fruits and effects of the things themselues whose
say but what ancient Father euer said so before you yea rather why forget you that this is often refuted by them as a leude and hereticall fansie Doeth not Sainct Augustine of purpose debate the matter and in euident termes giue this flat resolution against you Doubt not saieth hee the man Christ Iesus to bee nowe there whence he shall come to iudgement but keepe in minde and holde assured the christian confession that he rose from the dead ascended into heauen sitteth now at the right hand of his Father and from thence from no place else shall come to iudge the quicke and the dead And so shall he come by the very witnesse of Angels as he was seene to goe into heauen that is in the verie same forme substance of his fleshe the whâ—ch hee hath endued with immortalitie not bereaued of the former nature According to this forme of his manhood wee must not thinke him to bee diffunded in euerie place For we must beware that wee doe not so defende the God-head of a man that wee take from him the trueth of his body It is no good consequent that which is in God should bee euerie where as God himselfe is One person is both God and man and one Christ Iesus is both these euerie where as he is God in heauen as he is man Dout not I say that Christ our Lord is euerie where present as God but in some one place of heauen by the meanes of his true bodie And againe Let vs giue the same eare to the holy Gospell that we would to the Lord himselfe if he were present The Lord is aboue in heauen but the trueth is here which also the Lord is The body in which hee rose β can be but in one place â— his trueth is euery where dispersed Doeth not Vigilius a blessed Martyr and Bishoppe of Trident vpholde the verie same point against Eutyches and his accursed companions The fleshe of Christ sayeth hee WHEN IT WAS IN EARTH SVRELY WAS NOT IN HEAVEN AND NOWE BECAVSE IT IS IN HEAVEN CERTAINLIE IT IS NOT IN EARTH yea so farre it is from being in earth that wee looke for Christ after the flesh to come from heauen whom as hee is God the word we beleeue to be with vs in earth Then by your opinion either the worde is comprised in a place as well as the flesh of Christ or the flesh of Christ is euery where togither with the worde seeing one nature doeth not receiue in it selfe any different and contrary state Now to be contained in a place and to be present in euerie place be thinges diuerse and verie dislike and for so much as the word is euery where and the fleshe of Christ not euery where it is cleare that one and the same Christ is of both natures that is euerie where according to the nature of his diuinitie contained in a place according to the nature of his humanity This is the catholike faith and confession which the Apostles deliuered the Martyrs confirmed and the faithful persist in to this day Doth not Fulgentius handle the same question and precisely trace the steps of Sainct Augustine and Vigilius One and the same sonne of God hauing in him the trueth of the diuine and humane nature lost not the proprieties of the true Godhead and tooke also the proprieties of the true manhead one and the selfesame locall by that he tooke of man and infinite by that he had of his Father one and the verie same according to his humane substaunce absent from heauen when hee was in earth and forsaking the earth when hee ascended to heauen but according to his diuine and infinite substaunce neither leauing heauen when hee came downe from heauen neither departing from earth when hee ascended to heauen The which may bee gathered by the most certaine wordes of the Lord himselfe I ascend to my Father and your Father Howe coulde he ascende but as a locall and true man or howe can hee bee present with the faithfull but as an infinite and true God not as if the humane substance of Christ might bee euery where diffunded but because one and the same Sonne of God albeit according to the trueth of his manhead hee were then locally placed on earth yet according to his Godhead which in no wise is concluded in any place hee filled heauen and earth This true manhead of Christ which is locall as also his true Godhead which is alwayes infinite wee see taught by the Doctrine Apostolicall For that Paul might shewe the bodie of Christ as of verie man to bee contayned in a place he sayeth to the Thessalonians You turned to God from idolles to serue the liuing and true God and to looke for his Sonne from heauen declaring that hee surely shoulde corporally come from heauen whom he knewe to bee corporally raysed from the dead His conclusion is this Whereas then the fleshe of Christ is proued without question to bee contained in a place yet his Godhead is at all times euerie where by the witnesse of Paul c. These bee no wrested or maymed allegations but graue and aduised authorities of learned and auncient Fathers plainely concluding with vs against you that the fleshe of Christ is not absent onely from earth and nowe sitteth aboue at the right hande of GOD but also locally contayned in some one place of heauen by reason of the trueth of his bodie and therefore not dispersed in many places or present in euerie place as you would nowe make the world beleeue it is in your Masses Philand This was spoken of the shape but not of the substance of Christs bodie For Sainct Augustine sayeth Secundum hanc formam non est putandus vbique diffusus according to this externall shape and forme we must not thinke him euerie where diffused and yet the trueth and substaunce of his bodie may bee in many places at one time Theop. You forget that the rest say nature and substaunce as Vigilius Circumscribitur loco per naturam carnis suae Christ is circumscribed with place by the nature of his flesh and Fulgentius Secundum humanam substantiam derelinquens terram cum ascendisset in coelum according to his humane substaunce leauing the earth when hee ascended into heauen and againe Non quia humana Christi substantia fuisset vbique diffusa not as if the humane substaunce of Christ should bee euerie where diffunded By the which it is cleare that neither the forme nor substaunce of Christes bodie can be present in many places at one time And what doeth Sainct Augustine meane by the word forme but the perfection and trueth of mans nature as Ambrose Leo Chrysostome others doe What is sayeth Ambrose in the forme of God in the nature of God I demaund sayeth Leo what is ment by this taking the
good both in doctrine discipline a 1. Sam. 15. b 2. Sam. 22. c Esai 7. d Esai 9. e 1. Cor. 11. f Chrysost. in ca. 4. ad Philip. homil 13. g Idem homil 1. ad Papil Antioch Head of the Church belongeth properly to Christ. Praefat. 7. Centuriae Princes may not be deuisers of new religions We may by our oth serue God not men if their lawes dissent from his We be subiect to Princes in that we must suffer not in that we must obay whatsoeuer they coÌ„maund Apol. c. 4. sect 6. The Iesuites as bold with the ParliameÌ„t as they bee with the Prince Apol. cap. 4. sect 10. God will not be tied to the forme of humane iudgements The Church planted without any iudicial processe Apol. cap. 4. a sect 19. b sect 12. c sect 19. Christ wil not be subiect to the voices of men He hath authority enough that hath God on his side a Ios. 24. b 3. Kings 19. c 3. Kings 22. d Ierem. 23. e Amos. 7. f Mat. 3. g Acts. 5. h 6. i 23. The wicked alwaies asked the godly for their authority Mat. 21. Ioh. 1. Ioh. 1. Acts. 4. He that preacheth the same doctrine which the Apostles did hath the same coÌ„missioÌ„ which they had One man preaching trueth hath warrant enough against the whole worlde Tertul. de virg velandis The whole world drowned for resisting the preaching of one man Whether side hath trueth must be the question the rest is superfluous quareling Apol. cap. 4. sect 21. God must be obaied when he coÌ„maundeth whosoeuer dissent The Iesuites cal it a disorder to obey God before the Bishops Apol. cap. 4. sect 6. The Prince and the Parliament tooke not vpon theÌ„ the decision but the permission protection of trueth Queene Mary by ParliameÌ„t receiued the Pope why might not Queene Elizabeth doe as much for Christ We be bound to the faith of Christ not of our fathers Deut. 32. They be gone from the faith of their first fathers and egerly follow the blindnesse of their later fathers God hath not referred vs froÌ„ his word to our fathers Ezech. 20. Psal. 78. Psal. 95. Zach. 1. Ierem. 11. Ibidem vers 9. Our fathers may erre though his elect can not 2. Tim. 2. Mat. 24. Mark 13. Mat. 24. 2. Thes. 2. Reueâ— 13. All shall erre sauing the elect The elect cannot be discerned of men Mat. 7. To follow the greatest number is most dangerous Mat. 22. Our Fathers sinned and rebelled against God Psal. 106. Dan. 9. 2. Chron. 29. Mat. 3. Acts. 7. Our fathers cannot preâ—udice the trueth of God Luke 16. A parliament taking part with trueth hath the warrant of God the Magistrate Lay men may make their choise what faith they will professe The Prince is authorized from God to execute his commaundement The Iesuites presume that al is theâ—â—s The Prince may commaund for trueth though the bishops would say no. The Iesuites haue neither Gods law nor mans to make that which the Prince and the Parliament did to be voide for lacke of the Bishops assents The Kings of Iudah did coÌ„maund for trueth without Councels 2. Chron. 14. Cap. 15. Cap. 15. Cap. 15. 2. Chron. 29. 4. Kings 22. Christian Princes may doe the like ConstaÌ„tine authorized Christian religion without any Councel Euseb. de vita Constant. lib. 2. Iustinian had no Councell for the making of his constitutions But 6. general Councels in 790. yeres Sâ—c lib. 5. ca. 10. Theodosius made his own choise what religion he would establish when the second general councell could not get him to receiue the Arians from their churches Amphilochius did win him to it Theod. lib. 5. cap. 16. Realmes haue bin Christened vpon the perswasions of Lay men weâ—men India conuerted by Merchants * Ruffin l. 1. ca. 9 * And neuer asked the Priestes leaue so to doe * Socrat. lib. 1. cap. 19. Iberia coÌ„uerted by a woman Ruffin lib. 1. cap. 10. The Iesuites would haue beene eloqueÌ„t against this King that yeelded his Realme to Christ at the direction of a seeâ—â—e wenche Any man may serue Christ whosoeuer say nay Many Countries receiued the faith before they knew what the Church â—â—nt Act. 5. If trueth were â—â—ufficient â—â—â—charge for fishermen to withstand both Priests and Princes much more may Princes vpon that warrant neglect the consent of their own subiects though they be Priests Iohn 7. Railing on Princes is prohibited by the Law of God Exod. 21. Leuit. 20. Exod. 22. Eccle. 10. 3. Kings 2. Dauid iudged Shimei worthie to die for railing on him Vincentius Lirinens aduers haeres How Vincentius defineth Catholikes * VinceÌ„s aduers. haeres * Vincent IbideÌ„ Ibidem Quod semper vbique ab omnibus creditum est Worshipping of Images is against the Scriptures It hath not been beleeued at all times Neither in all places nor of all persons * Sigebert in anno 755. Continuationes Bedae anno 792. The Church of England against Images The churches of Fraunce Italie Germanie condeÌ„ned the second councell of Nice Regino lib. 2. anno 794. Hinâ—mar Remens contra Hincmar Iandunensem epist. cap. 20. The Councel of Nice the second refuted by a generall Synode of Germanie A whole book written in the refutation of the 2. Nicene Councell by Charles and his Bishops The Monkes haue razed our Nice and put in Constantinople Vrspergens in anno 793. That Councel was assembled at Nice and not at Constantinople * Tomo Concil 3. admonit Surij ad lector de Synod Francof â—ol 226. * Augu. Steuch de Donat. Constant lib. 2. numero 60. * Adon. aetase 6. Auent lib. 4. saith Scitae Graecoâ—um de adorandis Imaginibus rescissa sunt Their Monks and Friers being worshipers of Imageâ— themselues would not beleeue that the 2. Nicen CouÌ„cel was condemned for decreeing Images to bâ— worshipped The booke extaÌ„t agreeth with this report of Hincmarus The west Church 800. yeares after Christ suffred stories to be painted and carued in the Church but not to be worshipped as the seconde Councell of Nice concluded The Grecians were not so brutish as to decree diuine honour to stockes The west Church refused to giue any externall honor to images Greg. lib. 7. epist. 109. Stories painted in the Church but no picture worshipped * Sinne to worâ—hip pictures Gregor lib. 9 epist. 9. The scriptures prohibite the worâ—hipping of pictures Ambros. de obiâ—â—â— Theodos. Error wickednes to worship the Crosse that Christ died on Aug. de moribus ecclesiae Catholicae lib. â— cap. 34. Bowing and burning incense to the Image of Christ obiected to heretikâ— as Idolatrie August de haeresib haeres 7. Epipha in 80. haeres anacephâ— Epipha lib. 1. â—om 2. haeres 27. Iren. li. 1. ca. 24. The worshiping of Christs Image is idolatrie Exod. 20. Deut. 5. * Ephes. 5. * Phil 3. Bodily or ghostly honor giuen to any thing which God prohibiteth is Idolatrie Exod. 20. God prohibiteth the worshipping of
but hee should deny God Hee sinned not against the king when he constantly went forward in the exercise of prayer to God Daniel therefore doeth rightly defend himself that he did no wickednesse against the king in that being bound to obey the preceptes of God he neglected the kinges commaundement to the contrary Then follow your wordes that Princes loose their right to be obeyed when they presume to commaund against God and that wee were better defie their edictes to their faces than obey them when they waxe so froward that they will put God from his right and sit in his throne Phi. For declaration of this text and for cutting off all cauillation about the interpretation of his wordes your brother Beza shall speake next who alloweth and highly commendeth in writing the fighting in Fraunce for religion against the lawes and lawfull king of that countrie saying in his Epistle dedicatorie of his new Testamēt to the Queene of England her selfe That the Nobility of France vnder the noble Prince of Condy laide the first foundation of restoring true Christian religion in France by consecrating most happily their blood to God in the battel of Druze Where of also the Ministers of the reformed French Churches as their phrase is do giue their common verdict in the confession of their faith thus We affirme that subiects must obey the Lawes pay tribute beare all burdens imposed and sustaine the yoke euen of infidel Magistrates so for all that that the supreme dominion and due of God bee not violated Theo. You haue already belied Caluine and nowe you take the like course with Beza and the French churches Their speach can bee no declaration of Caluines words if they did leane that way which you make them as they doe not therefore this is but a Friers tricke to abuse both writers Readers Phi. Beza highly commendeth the fighting in Fraunce for religion against the Lawes and lawfull king of that countrie Theo. The battell which Beza speaketh of was neither against the Lawes nor the king of that countrie That olde fore the Duke of Guise hating the Nobles of Fraunce as being himselfe a straunger and seeking to tredde them downe whom he knew inclined to religion that he might strengthen him selfe and his house to take the crowne if ought shoulde befall the kinges line as his sonne the yong Duke at this present in armes for that cause doth not sticke to professe watching his oportunitie whiles the king of Fraunce was yet vnder yeares armed him-selfe to the field as his sonne now doth and against all Lawe with open force murdered many hundreth subiectes as they were making their prayers to God in their assemblies vpon pretence that their seruice was not permitted by the Lawes of that Realme The Nobles and Princes of Fraunce perceiuing his malice seeing his iniustice that being a subiect as they were he would with priuate and armed violence murder innocents neither conuented nor condemned which the king himselfe if he had beene of age by the lawes of their Countrie could not doe gathered togither to keepe their owne liues from the fury of that violent bloodsucker and in that case if they did repell force what haue you to say against it or why should not Beza praise the Prince of Condy and others for defending the Lawes of God and that Realme against the Guises open iniurie with the consecrating of their blood most happily to God Phi. The Duke did nothing without the king and the Queene mother and therefore impugning the one they impugne the other Theo. The king was yong and in the Guises hands therefore his consent with the Peeres states of his Realme that a subiect should doe execution vpon his people by the sword without all order of iustice could bee nothing worth The king had neither age to discerne it nor freedome to denie it nor law to decree it Phi. The Queene mother had her sonne in custodie and not the Duke and with her consent were these thinges done Theo. Of the Queene mother of Fraunce I will say no more but that the auncient lawe of that Realme did barre her from the Crowne and therefore her consenting with the Guise might sharpen the doer but not authorize the deede Phi. Defend you then their bearing armes against the king Theo. To depriue the king or annoy the Realme they bare none but to saue themselues from the violent and wrongfull oppression of one that abused the kinges youth to the destruction of his lawes Nobles and commons Phi. As you say Theo. And you shall neuer proue the contrary But these thinges are without our limites Wee be scholers not souldiers diuines not lawyers English not French The circumstances of their warres no man exactly knoweth besides themselues as also we knowe not the lawes of that Land We wil therefore not enter these actes which haue so many parts precedentes causes concurrents and those to vs vnknowen and yet all to bee discussed and proued before Beza may be charged with this opinion by his cōmending the battel of Druze but will rather giue you his vndoubted iudgement out of his owne workes quite against that which you slaunder him with Purposely treating of the obedience which is due to Magistrates thus hee resolueth Quod autem attinet ad priuatos homines tenere illos oportet plurimum inter se differre iniuriam inferre iniuriam pati Iniuriam enim pati nostrum est sic praecipiente Domino suo exemplo nobis praeeunte quum nobis illam vi arcere non licet ex nostrae vocationis praescripto extra quam nefas est nobis vel pedem ponere neque aliud vllum remedium hic proponitur priuatis hominibus tyranno subiectis praeter vitae emendationem preces lacrymas As touching priuate men they must holde great difference betweene doing and suffering wrong It is our part to suffer iniurie the Lord so commaunding and teaching vs by his owne example for so much as it is not lawfull for vs to repell it with force by the prescript of our calling from the which we may not step one foote neither is there here proposed any other remedy for priuate men that are vnder a tyrant but the amending of their liues and therewithall prayers and teares And making a plaine distinction betweene not obeying and taking armes whē the Magistrate commaundeth against God hee saith This rule is firme and sure that we must obey God rather than man so often as we can not obey the preceptes of men but wee must violate the authoritie of that supreme King of Kinges and Lord of Lordes yet so that wee remember it is one thing not to obey them and an other thing to resist or take armes which God hath not permitted thee So the midwiues are praised that obeyed not Pharaoh and the Apostles and all the Prophetes and Martyrs could by no tyrants bee
brought to betray the truth with their silence What then we thinke of the subiectes dutie to the Magistrate you shall far more certainly and truly learne by this our doctrine than by their slanders which are not ashamed to ioyne vs with the frantike Anabaptistes subuerting the Magistrates authority How the confession of the reformed churches in Fraunce should allow rebellion I see no coniecture in their words vnlesse a rebel may haue them to mistake and depraue at his pleasure Subiectes must obey the lawes pay tribute beare al burdens imposed and sustaine the yoke euen of infidel Magistrates so for all that that the supreme dominion due of God be not violated What mislike you in these words Would you that Infidels should bee serued afore or aboue God Phi. Their meaning is that if Gods due be once violated we must no longer pay tribute nor obey the Lawes of any Prince Theo. How gather you that out of this place Their wordes sound otherwise Subiectes must obey the lawes and sustaine the yoke euen of Infidels so that the supreme dominion of God be not violated Phi. If that be violated they must obey no longer but elect an other Prince Theo. That is your rebellious inclination not their position They say subiectes must obey Princes so farre foorth as the supreme dominion of God bee not violated In any matter if the choice come betweene God and the Prince which of the twaine shal be serued and obeied God must euer be preferred Phi. Surely they meane that if once the Magistrate violate the supreme dominion of God we must account him no longer a magistrate Theo. The diuell himselfe can shew no greater malice than to peruert that which is well spoken and to force a leude sense of his owne on an other mans wordes It is euident they neuer ment that if the Magistrate once violate Gods due the peâ—ple might reiect him for then were it not needeful at al to sustaine the yoke of aâ— infidel as their owne wordes import because he can not be an Infidell except he first violate the supreme dominion of God by commanding against his truth in matters of religion and therefore they ment as their wordes lie that euen Infidels if they bee Princes must be obeyed but so that Gods due bee euer forprised If they presume to violate the dominion which God hath reserued to himselfe we may not rebel that is your Iesuitical doctrine but disobey them in that or any point that is prescribed by man against the will of God and submit our selues to indure persecution for righteousnesse sake which as our Sauiour assureth vs is not without great and happy recompence Phi. Zuinglius likewise a cater-cosen to the Caluinistes in religion writeth thus If the Empire of Rome or what other soueraigne soeuer should oppresse the sincere Religion and we negligently suffer the same wee shal be charged with contempt no lesse than the oppressors thereof themselues whereof we haue an example in the fifteenth of Ieremy where the destruction of the people is prophecied for that they suffered their king Manasses being impious and vngodly to be vnpunished And more plaine in an other place When kinges saith he rule vnfaithfully and otherwise than the rule of the Gospell prescribeth they may with God be deposed as when they punish not wicked persons but specially when they aduance the vngodly as idle Priests c. Such may be depriued of their dignity as Saul was Theo. I vndertake not to discusse or defend ech seueral mans opinioÌ„ or speech The Romanes we know could neuer abide in their citie the name of a king The commonwealthes of Venice Millan Florence Genua are of the same minde Many states haue gouernors for life or for yeares as they best liked that first erected their policies yet a soueraignty still remaning somwhere in the people somewhere in the Senate somwhere in the Prelates Nobles that elect or assist the Magistrate who hath his iurisdictioÌ„ allotted and prefixed vnto him thus far and no further and may be resisted recalled from any tyrannous excesse by the generall and publike consent of the whole state where hee gouerneth In Germanie the Emperour him-selfe hath his boundes appointed him which he may not passe by the lawes of the Empire the Princes Dukes cities that are vnder him haue power to gouerne vse the sworde as Gods ministers in their own charges And though for the maintenance of the Empire they be subiect to such orders as shall bee decreed in the conuent of all their States and according to that direction are to furnish the Emperour with men and monie for his necessarie warres and defences yet if he touch their policies infringe their liberties or violate the specialties which hee by oth and order of the Empire is bound to keepe they may lawfully resist him and by force reduce him to the ancient and receiued fourme of Gouernment or else repell him as a tyrant and set an other in his place by the right and freedome of their Country Therefore the Germanes doinges or writinges can helpe you litle in this question They speake according to the lawes and rights of the Empire theÌ„selues being a verie free state and bearing the sworde as lawfull Magistrates to defend their liberties and prohibite iniurie against all oppressours the Emperour himselfe not excepted In this sense Zuinglius may say that if the Empire of Rome or any other Soueraigne should oppresse the truth they that haue rightful power by the lawes of their country to withstand should negligently suffer the same they shal be charged with contempt no lesse than the oppressors themselues but that subiectes and such as are onely bounde to obey and not by the Lawes of the Lande authorised to vse the sworde shoulde take weapon in hande to displace the Prince and change the state that Zuinglius neuer sayde nor much lesse that the Pope might warrant such priuate violence Phi. For his example he bringeth the men of Iuda and Ierusalem whom God by Ieremie threatned to destroy for that they suffered their king Manasses being impious and vngodly to be vnpunished yet the people of Israel had no such Soueraingty ouer their king Theo. What Soueraignty the whole people of Israel had ouer their kinges is a question amongst the learned Zuinglius might be of opinion they had When Saul would haue put Ionathan his son to death the people would not suffer him so to do but deliuered Ionathan that hee died not When Dauid purposed the reducing of the Arke his speech to the people was If it please you we will send to the rest of our brethren that they may assemble themselues vnto vs. After Salomons death all the congregation of Israell came and said to Roboam make thy fathers yoke which he put vpon vs lighter and we wil serue thee as if it had lien in their choice